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


On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Jeffrey Watts wrote:

> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 02:14:59 -0600 (CST)
> From: Jeffrey Watts <watts@jayhawks.net>
> To: Jochem Huhmann <joh@gmx.net>
> Cc: lsb-discuss@lists.linuxbase.org
> Subject: Re: RFC
> Resent-Date: 16 Mar 2000 08:15:08 -0000
> Resent-From: lsb-discuss@lists.linuxbase.org
> Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ;
> On 16 Mar 2000, Jochem Huhmann wrote:
> > RPM has no way to tell between "system software" and "totally
> > unimportant stuff". A package is a package is a package. That's the
> > problem. And RPMs can support relocatable packages only in so far as
> > the software it carries; if this software has hardcoded paths in it,
> > this is meaningless. This won't change to soon, so either one has to
> > accept this /usr-bloat or has to specify where things should go to. If
> > you say "hey, you can decide yourself, it's relocatable" you don't
> > need standards at all.
> In no way should the package manager be deciding where to install
> software.  That's what the distributors are for.  A package manager should
> be reading the destination from the command line if it is present, or from
> the locations specified in the package.
> We don't want a smart package manager.  The distributions wouldn't use it,
> and it would piss off sysadmins like me that want real control.
> It would be like having Pine type your emails for you.  Did Pine type out
> this message for me?  Did it correctly detect that sarcasm was needed for
> this email?  Nope.  I did that myself.  :-)
Do we need a package manager at all? 
Probably yes, expecially in front of other Unixes. Even this kind
of horses that are HP-UX and AIX come with a really good packet manager,
also if i dislike the gui.
Do we need this to work as rpm does?
please no! save me!
Forst of all this dependency stuff!
i install a library from sources, then a packet in rpm that needs this
library, and i cannot do it, at less i have to specify --nodeps, and then
i will have problems at every upgrade and so on...
On some point the really usable packet manager is just .tgz from
slackware, and belive me it is the smartest. if I want i can even install
the package really by hand. It is something really similar to solaris,
but more flexible. The just one think that would be needed is a better
controll for configuration files during upgrades, that means better
install.sh scripts.

Reply to: