Re: dpkg v2 ? I haven't heard about it, but ...
On Wednesday 21 July 1999, at 21 h 6, the keyboard of Ian Jackson
> to take more seriously a rumour that I heard: namely, that a bunch of
> C++ weenies wanted to rewrite dpkg.
The "rumour" has been discussed on debian-private several times...
> There are a number of things
> I'd like to say, in no particular order.
As a poor programmer, maintainer of a few unused packages, unable to
understand the wonderful code of dpkg (I tried) and even more unable to find
something in the wonderful bug list of dpkg <http://www.debian.org/Bugs/db/pa/l
dpkg.html>, I want to add:
> * I don't think that most of dpkg needs to be rewritten.
As I said, I'm not unable to decipher dpkg's code with my small brain. I just
see the results:
1) Long bug list,
2) Nobody dares to modify dpkg. For instance, when we discussed versioned
provides, instead of talking about wether it is a good idea or not, we always
stopped when someone said 'but it would mean modify dpkg'...
> * I am actively working on dpkg.
#1797: upgrade/downgrade dependency calculation problem Package: dpkg;
Severity: grave; Reported by: Ian Jackson <email@example.com>; merged
with #5639, #6842, #6843, #7956; 1356 days old.
> * Many of the problems that are in current dpkg versions (particularly
> the build system) are the result of NMUs.
And why so many NMUs? Because there is no active team working seriously on
> * I shall be releasing a new maintainer-upload of dpkg into unstable
> Real Soon Now (tm).
> * One of the main reasons that dpkg is unapproachable by poor to
> mediocre programmers
> is that it must performs a complex task with a
> very high level of reliability .
Right. dpkg never corrupted my system, even if I like to press Control-C at
the wrong time. But do not assume than anyone else is unable to do this job.
> * A number of competent people seem to have little difficulty working
> on dpkg.
The people who make NMUs you are referring about previously?
>  Please do take offence if you're one of those people who think
> that C++ and object-orientation are the right solution to nearly every
> serious programming problem,
As a moronic user, I don't care: you can write it in Emacs Lisp, if you want.
> or if you find most of the dpkg source
> code difficult to understand. Otherwise this insult is not directed
> at you.
Myself, and my fellow monkeys just recently released from the zoo to install
Debian systems, believe someone talks about us here?