Standardizing the install Package...
Sorry for not lurking in the backround but I feel the need to bring a
small point to attention ...
After reading the current preliminary framework for the LSB , I happened
to notice that the issue
reguarding package standarization was brought forward by Stuart Anderson
. The specification
tentatively points toward the rpm format as a standard and this will
probably work well . However
the rpm system introduced the concept of a program registry ( on default
Red Hat systems it is in
/var/lib/rpm )to linux and while this is very useful it does not lend
itself well when one is installing
non-rpm packages . To settle on rpm style of program registry will
benefit linux , expansion of
that registry so that other package formats (ie tar.gz and .deb ) can
declare themselves to this
registry would go a long way to providing a basis for standardizing
package installation . For
example if source tar.gz package included and small description along
with a list of dependencies
and programs installed by the Makefile while rpm provided a method
whereby
this information could be included into the rpm registry , then a decent
dependecy and installed
package database could be built that truly reflected the state of a
linux machine .At this point in time
if I install a tar.gz source or binary package in my R.H. system , I
have to manually adjust my
program registry to reflect that the package is present . To install an
arbitrary rpm on my Caldera
system is an absolute nightmare . It can be worked around , but its
painful .You may notice
that this is a concept which M$ have used to gain a great deal of
fuctionality between M$ and
non-M$ software. (When they have allowed interaction to occur ). By
applying the same
basic principal to linux , ie , a standard program registry which can be
manipulated by a variety
of installation formats , a vendor /developer can select whichever
package format suits their
developement methods while implementing a standardized registry method .
Its a topic that I feel
is worth further investigation .
My 2c worth . Cheers Mik Voase . (goes back to lurking in the
backround...)
Reply to: