Re: improvements
On Fri, 10 Jan 1997, Richard G. Roberto wrote:
> 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?).
>
Give me some time ( I'm working currently of totally new release of 3-5
new packages ) and I will send you (and to debian) a concretisation of my
idea of virtual packages who can greatly ease the installation process.
Mostly, you can do it by yourself (I send previous posting about it some
months ago about local-deps - just the same thing but with little more
configuration.).
Ciao!
Fab
--
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: