Re: ipkg Vs emdeb

[Henrion Benjamin <bh@udev.org>]

Philippe De Swert <philippedeswert@scarlet.be> [050109]:
> Hi Benjamin,
> 
> On Sat, 2005-01-08 at 15:32 +0100, Henrion Benjamin wrote:
> > I would like to know which package system is the best between ipkg and
> > emdeb.
> 
> Emdebian would use the normal debian package format. (With some wrappers
> around apt/dpkg you can actually install them in a chroot concurrently
> on your system). Also the ipkg package manager can deal with deb
> packages, as the two formats are quite similar.
> 
> However ipkg has a less robust dependency management, and does not
> fetches packages as well as apt does. Also there is no support for
> orphaned packages, upgrading is much harder.... in respect to apt/dpkg.

On the naming question, I don't know if the idea of having a *.emdeb
instead of *.deb is appropriate.

I don't know how to add the naming for embedded systems, since it is
compiled against uclibc.

Also, if the goal is to create a repository of emdeb packages, it should
compile against a fixed version of gcc/uclibc.

Which gcc/uclibc fixed version to choose?

> (As far as I know of course)
> 
> > It seems to me that there is no standard way to get the sources from an
> > ipk package, no?
> 
> There is no standard way that I know of. Most sources could probabaely
> be found in the OE trees that are used by handhelds/familiar and
> openzaurus. 

Yes, that's why maintaining *.ipk packages is nearly a headacke.

-- 
Benjamin Henrion <bh@udev.org>
http://bh.udev.org
<<< Push the Parliament democracy against Commission-Council Terrorism >>>
<<<   Promoting Abuses of the Patent System is Juridical Terrorism     >>>
<<<                         http://swpat.ffii.org                      >>>