Re: dpkg musings
Previously Joey Hess wrote:
> While your API will allow for things like ucf (or aptitude) to use the
> same DB as dpkg does for managing config files, it does not allow dpkg's
> conffile prompting interface to be replaced.
Which is an orthogonal issue, but indeed one that should also be
> > + since we can now have an arbitrary number of files for a package
> > we can longer distribute it as seperate .orig.tar.gz, .diff.gz and
> > .dsc but we will have to put it in real package format. This
> > should be either files in a ar archive like the deb format, or
> > (my preference) a tar file.
> This has the potential to make it impossible for some of us to continue
> maintaining certian source packages, because we do not have enormous
> amounts of bandwidth.
I'm not sure what exactly your problem is. If you maintain sources you
will most likely use a source control system (cvs/svn/arch/bk/etc.)
instead of downloading packaged sources. If you want to mirror sources
you are likely to already have reasonable bandwidth already or you will
need a smarter mirror tool.
Wichert Akkerman <firstname.lastname@example.org> It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.