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

Re: "dselect" replacement project ("deity")y

On Sun, 13 Apr 1997, P.A.M. van Dam wrote:

> > This is the real issue.  If you could select the 'high level' groups
> > and only deal with the components if you want the option it would
> > be fine.  But if I select a group I want it to mean 'install what
> > it takes to make this work', not 'tell me about some other things
> > I need to do first in some unknown order'.
> It would be really nice to have some highlever package order, like
> some commercial UNIX vendors have. For example one might have the choice
> to install everything as it suits himself or choose some highlevel packages
> like a KDE environment using Dutch locales or a OpenLook environent or just
> good old non-graphic install. It makes it much easier for newbies. We need
> some hierarchy in the package structures.
> > 
> > Les Mikesell
> >   les@mcs.com
> > 
> >
> Best regards,
> 	Pascal

I'm sorry to be dogmatic, but I'm going to say one more time that I like
things the way they are.  If something depends on seperately maintained
library xyz it is not good but *GREAT* to know about it from the start. 
The dependency structure sends this message to users load and clear, in a
way that a lumped package scheme would not even if a full description of
all dependencies were given when such a package was installed.  I really
had no clue about the high level of software interdependence when I
started with slackware, and it hurt me continually.  I think a little pain
with dselect in the beginning would have saved me a lot of grief later.

Lets give a more understandable dselect a chance.  It could be made
infinitely more comprehensible.  Am I right in thinking that when one
package you include during a 'dependence session' requires another
package, you get a new sort of recursive dependence session?  I feel that
I shouldn't really have to be confused about this sort of thing.  

I like six eggs when starting on a journey.  Fried - not poached.  And
mind you don't break 'em.  I won't eat a broken egg.  
                                              -- Thorin Oakenshield 

Reply to: