Re: Debian-Lite : The Project
Alan is absolutely right.
The base install will always include a dpkg/dselect tool. There are
certain components of base that are always necessary in order to provide a
maintainable and upgradable system. These will always need to be installed
and kept available.
The current packaging system already allows for changing selections, so
the installation procedure could present choices and then set the database
accordingly. This could mark packages for removal or installation.
This raises the question of whether a package belongs in base or not. If
there is to be no serial port usage at all (not uncommon) why is setserial
found in binary/base? It would be best if packages in base were only
removed when replaced with upgrades or alternatives.
Fragmentation of packages could actually be desirable if done right.
Sometimes all a user wants is foo-util and has to install foo-tools to get
it.
For those who upgrade via ftp proper fragmentation could be a big help.
Sometimes a large package file is downloaded because a few lines of text
have changed. It can be worse with source. The xfree86 source is packed
into a 42mb file.
Additional control info fields might be a help. When experienced users are
building a server, they don't want any docs or examples installed. Network
installation of a package would put shared files on one machine but there
could be private config or status files which are needed on each local
machine. This would allow the package installer to simply verify that the
latest binaries are present (even though they are readonly) and then
install the local files. This would make it easy to build
network workstations.
On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Alan Eugene Davis wrote:
> Possibly the need for "Debian Lite" would be lessened with completion
> of a friendly dselect or replacement for dselect, that would present
> some reasonable options.
>
> My biggest worry is the multiplication of packages. Perhaps it is an
> inevitable situation with the kind of distribution that Debian is,
> but I am beginning to be intimidated by the fragmentation of packages
> into this and that spin-off. Like *-altdev, for example. I still use
> dpkg, cause I don't seem to jibe with the dselect mentality---I live
> in fear of completely trashing my system, irrevocably, using dselect,
> and any other software that makes those kinds of global decisions for
> me. I'm never sure when I have everything turned off.
>
> I also think that it may be useful to incorporate new fields into the
> info file for each package, indicating more information about
> relationships to other packages than only "conflicts" and "requires".
>
> Alan Davis
> adavis@netpci.com
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ Paul Wade Greenbush Technologies Corporation +
+ mailto:paulwade@greenbush.com http://www.greenbush.com/ +
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ http://www.greenbush.com/cds.html Now shipping version 1.3.X +
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: