Nicholas Petreley (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote: > * Bodo Bauer (email@example.com) [001023 16:04]: > > Eric S. Raymond (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote: > > > Nicholas Petreley <email@example.com>: > > > > Instead, we should define an installation protocol that > > > > looks for programs and libraries within the filesystem > > > > itself in order to detect if dependencies are met. > > > > > > Nick, I think this is a case where the search for perfection is far less > > > important that getting a solution in place that does 90% of the job and > > > can evolve to do 100%. > > > > I (as an ex Zenguin guy...:) agree with Eric. We have RPM and it works well > > in most of the cases. A 100% solution is too much of a dream to become > > reality any time soon. And quite frankly I don't know if I'd like to > > have one and only one package format. Competition is good and it drives > > technology (see Gnome/KDE... :). > > Huh? One of my main points was that a protocol approach > allows you to use any package format. Sorry, didn't mean to put you in a corner there. But still I think we should rather spent more effort in defining the RPM format more closely than looking for the perfect solution. I'm sure there is a procedural way to do it. But even the Zenguin approach was using the common package formats. The idea was to have a precedural analysis of the exosting system and the create native (whatever native is) packages on the fly and install them on the system. This approach however doens't work for initital installation. BB -- Bodo Bauer Principal Software Engineer firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.turbolinux.com Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value A.E.
Description: PGP signature