[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: improvements



On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Nathan L. Cutler wrote:

> Indeed, it might be worth considering doing away with the
> classification of "required", "recommended", "extra", "important",
> etc., because every person's needs and desires are different.
> Obviously, if the system won't run without it, it is "required" de
> facto.
> 
> This might reduce the dselect confusion.

This can be done without changing package dependency data.  We
really just need to have a different interface for installing.
The current installer only takes you as far as getting base
installed and then throws us into dselect.  There needs to be an
intermediate step that allows for "simplified" installation of a
choice of several install profiles.  This is non-trivial however.
All packages of a given section cannot be installed and someone
needs to decide on which packages go in the canned profile and
which don't.  This needs to be a dynamic list that requires
active management much like the existing release and it would not
replace any part of the existing release process, so it means
more work.  This really should be done by "oem" types, but that
isn't how debian is getting distributed (yet?).

Just my $.02

Richard G. Roberto
richr@bear.com
011-81-3-3437-7967 - Tokyo, Japan


--
*******************************************************************************
Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation, offer or
agreement or any information about any transaction, customer account or account
activity contained in this communication.
*******************************************************************************


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com


Reply to: