Ben Collins writes ...
You are missing the fact that the old package does not understand that
the new package possibly setup some things (configuration settings,
diversions, symlinks, removal of cruft, alternatives) that it cannot
recover from. You are missing the fact that it is not as
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:23:43AM -0700, Matt Taggart wrote:
In the Rambling apt-get ideas thread, Vince Mulhollon writes ...
Use a apt-get client to remotely mess with another workstations packages.
Messing with only one workstation at a time is boring. How about multicast
to configure
Hello
Petr Èech wrote:
Adam Lazur wrote:
The ability to install more than one version of a package simultaneously.
Hmm. SO you install bash 2.04-1 and bash 2.02-3. Now what will be /bin/bash
2.04 or 2.02 version? You will divert both of them and symlink it to the old
name - maybe, but but how
== Thorsten Wilmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello Petr Èech wrote:
Adam Lazur wrote:
The ability to install more than one version of a package
simultaneously.
Hmm. SO you install bash 2.04-1 and bash 2.02-3. Now what will
be /bin/bash 2.04 or 2.02 version? You
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 07:37:21PM +0100, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
Apart from that, anyone who cares what version to use must use the
full path to the binary or a versioned name, like /bin/bash-2.04-1.
I would like binaries to be compiled to reside in versioned
directories but I also see a
Bam == Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dwayne == Dwayne C Litzenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dwayne So my question is: What do you wish for in a package
Dwayne manager?
Run fast, and do not do things like update-something twice when
upgrading several packages at once
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 03:40:21PM +0100, Laurent Martelli wrote:
/usr/doc - /usr/share/doc transition problems are one consequence of
this. If files were tagged according to some high level criterions, it
would be easier to put change the physical location during
installation. Setting the
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Adi Stav wrote:
I've had similar thoughts, and I thought that perhaps some of
functions of installation scripts can be replaced by hook scripts that
dpkg would run.
Something like this is planned for dpkg 1.9, currently in development in cvs.
BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 11:47:44PM +, Mark Seaborn wrote:
They are unrelated if they do not need to communicate (as an
example). If they do not need to communicate, they may as well run on
different machines, in which case they can use different versions of
libc. But I want to be able
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 01:03:03AM +, Mark Seaborn wrote:
Of course. I know this. It is repeated many times on this mailing
list. But it does not have to be so. Why should upgrading package X
affect unrelated package Y? If one user wants
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 11:23:24PM +, Mark Seaborn wrote:
As I suggested before, it would be easy if different processes could
have different views on the filesystem. This is feasible on the
Hurd. Linux is not as flexible, unfortunately.
There are a few ways to do it, but I guess it is
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 11:23:24PM +, Mark Seaborn wrote:
They are unrelated if they do not need to communicate (as an
example). If they do not need to communicate, they may as well run on
different machines, in which case they can use different versions of
libc. But I want to be able
Hi
Hamish Moffatt schrieb:
Package X and package Y are not truely unrelated if they share any
dynamic libraries, though, eg libc.
So do you have any suggestion as to how this could actually be
implemented? Even if it's actually desirable (which I dispute),
implementation seems far from
Just one simple small thing for me, please: An installer that is smart
enough to realize that it is about to overflow the disc, so it deletes
any .deb files that have been downloaded and already installed. (This
bit me once while doing an install over PPP.)
Cheers,
Richard
--
__ _
|_)
as possible. For
now, the work will be strictly academic, but if it works out, it may evolve
into future standard package manager.
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
Ideas:
Well, I think a coherit method for managing config files and
configuration of packages. An easy
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 08:41:43PM +, Mark Seaborn wrote:
I want a system where I can install multiple versions of a library
(or any package really) and say which version I want each program
on the system to use, possibly on a per-user basis.
Sorry if I'm a bit late to the party, but I'm going to look into doing
something similiar to what Dwayne's doing, with a heavy Java slant. Anyway,
I wrote up a wishlist of sorts here :
http://www.devel.e-plagiarism.com/~entropy/proposals/jam.html
The ideas seem sound, but I haven't had too many
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 09:30:13PM +1030, Matthew Tuck wrote:
- if my apt download was terminated halfway through and I have no
internet time left, I would still get to install my fully downloaded
packages without messing around with dpkg and trying to work out the
dependencies manually
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 01:03:03AM +, Mark Seaborn wrote:
Of course. I know this. It is repeated many times on this mailing
list. But it does not have to be so. Why should upgrading package X
affect unrelated package Y? If one user wants to use packages from
Package X and package Y
Adam Lazur wrote:
The ability to install more than one version of a package simultaneously.
Hmm. SO you install bash 2.04-1 and bash 2.02-3. Now what will be /bin/bash
2.04 or 2.02 version? You will divert both of them and symlink it to the old
name - maybe, but but how will you know, to what
On Mon, 25 Dec 2000, Petr Èech wrote:
Some intelligence for handling multiple machines. Like the ability to nfs
mount /usr and have the package manager understand what's going on.
sounds like something like --exclude /usr (didn't doogie implement this in 1.8
branch?)
No, this is destined
Jeffry Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
download the source, have my machine do the compile, but still have
all the dependencies properly worked out (sort of an expanded apt-get
-b source).
I guess you should get both the ordinary depends and the
build-depends. I fail to see where there should
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 08:41:43PM +, Mark Seaborn wrote:
Dwayne C . Litzenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
I want a system where I can install multiple versions of a library (or
any package really) and say which version I
Dwayne C . Litzenberger wrote:
I'm starting work on a new linux package manager. The idea is to be able to
replace rpm, dpkg, apt, dselect (backend) with one,written mostly from scratch
and designed to be as simple (code, not features) and clean as possible. For
now, the work will be
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 07:54:00PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
personally the plain text database is one of dpkg's greatest assets.
its a royal pain to repair a binary database when it gets fscked. and
yes i have already been saved from a total reinstall through the
ability to fix dpkg's
) and clean as possible. For
now, the work will be strictly academic, but if it works out, it may evolve
into future standard package manager.
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
dpkg + something to handle package splits/merges a bit more sanely.
netbase split to XXX
* Ethan Benson
| personally the plain text database is one of dpkg's greatest assets.
| its a royal pain to repair a binary database when it gets fscked. and
| yes i have already been saved from a total reinstall through the
| ability to fix dpkg's broken database with a text editor.
Joseph Carter wrote:
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 07:54:00PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
personally the plain text database is one of dpkg's greatest assets.
its a royal pain to repair a binary database when it gets fscked. and
yes i have already been saved from a total reinstall through the
Dwayne C . Litzenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
-- On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 11:44:13AM -0500, Adam Lazur wrote:
Dwayne C . Litzenberger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package
manager?
Relocatable packages so a user can do an individual package
install
Dwayne C . Litzenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
I want a system where I can install multiple versions of a library (or
any package really) and say which version I want each program on the
system to use, possibly on a per-user basis
Hi
Mark Seaborn schrieb:
I want a system where I can install multiple versions of a library (or
any package really) and say which version I want each program on the
system to use, possibly on a per-user basis. The present system is a
disaster waiting to happen: If I install a package from
(code, not features) and clean as
Dwayne possible. For now, the work will be strictly academic,
Dwayne but if it works out, it may evolve into future standard
Dwayne package manager.
Dwayne So my question is: What do you wish for in a package
Dwayne manager?
1. Built in support
Brian May wrote:
2. Get rid of maintainer scripts (don't ask me how...) so that
upgrading packages is guaranteed not to destroy your computer, even if
the package came an from untrusted source. This could be carried
further by saying no daemons can be started by UID=root without
express
Another thing I would like is something like the BSD ports -
download the source, have my machine do the compile, but still have
all the dependencies properly worked out (sort of an expanded apt-get
-b source).
--
jeff smith
exa == exa Eray writes:
exa You need to devise a package description/configuration
exa language that is declarative rather than procedural.
exa What comes to my mind would be some sort of logical
exa language, maybe something based on Prolog. That the
exa statements as your
Dwayne C . Litzenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
I agree with Ethan. Start explaining why you want to reinvent the
wheel then we maybe has some ideas for things to do when you
reinventing for other reasons.
The only feature I've
Hi guys,
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
I agree with Ethan. Start explaining why you want to reinvent the
wheel then we maybe has some ideas for things to do when you
reinventing for other reasons.
If I had to change something in the Debian package manager
Ethan Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the debian packaging system answered most things i want from a
packaging system. what exactly is missing/wrong with the debian
packaging system that makes you feel the need for wheel reinvention?
I also cannot see anything wrong with the Debian packaging
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 09:52:47AM +0100, Sami Dalouche wrote:
Hi guys,
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
I agree with Ethan. Start explaining why you want to reinvent the
wheel then we maybe has some ideas for things to do when you
reinventing for other
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 09:18:09AM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote:
Dwayne C . Litzenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
I agree with Ethan. Start explaining why you want to reinvent the
wheel then we maybe has some ideas for things
is very important in this free software enterprise.
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
That it isn't just a package manager. It should cook the coffee for me.
More importantly:
It should be re-usable as a library for implementing packages/modules
for PLs
Dwayne C. Litzenberger writes:
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
Undo.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
will be strictly academic, but if it works out, it may evolve
into future standard package manager.
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
Something I have wished for in dpkg is a --rollback option, to undo
the installation of a package and revert
Previously John Hasler wrote:
Undo.
dpkg will support rollback at some point, when reiserfs supports
transactions.
Wichert.
--
/ Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scavenging the mail folder uncovered Wichert Akkerman's letter:
Previously John Hasler wrote:
Undo.
dpkg will support rollback at some point, when reiserfs supports
transactions.
that's completely crazy. will you force anybody who wants rollback to
use raiserfs? generic applications like
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 03:50:41PM +0100, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
Scavenging the mail folder uncovered Wichert Akkerman's letter:
Previously John Hasler wrote:
Undo.
dpkg will support rollback at some point, when reiserfs supports
transactions.
that's completely crazy. will
Scavenging the mail folder uncovered Ben Collins's letter:
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 03:50:41PM +0100, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
Scavenging the mail folder uncovered Wichert Akkerman's letter:
Previously John Hasler wrote:
Undo.
dpkg will support rollback at some point, when
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 04:10:43PM +0100, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
Scavenging the mail folder uncovered Ben Collins's letter:
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 03:50:41PM +0100, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
Scavenging the mail folder uncovered Wichert Akkerman's letter:
Previously John Hasler
Dwayne C . Litzenberger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
Relocatable packages so a user can do an individual package install into ~
without being r00t (this may be possible now with some dpkg foo?).
The ability to install more than one
Federico Di Gregorio writes:
or am i missing something?
In addition to the things Ben mentioned, dependencies and broken
installs.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 09:52:47AM +0100, Sami Dalouche wrote:
If I had to change something in the Debian package manager, I would
like it to use bzip2 instead of gzip, but this doesn't need a
omplete reimplementation. The problem isn't technical, but it's been
debated many times. I don't
Joseph Carter wrote:
I think if dpkg used some sort of hashed database index it would be a hell
of a lot nicer to people's CPUs and memory. Whether or not that requires
a re-implemenetation of dpkg or not isn't for me to say since I haven't
looked at dpkg's code in 3 years.
That smells
On Sun, 24 Dec 2000, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
Joseph Carter wrote:
I think if dpkg used some sort of hashed database index it would be a hell
of a lot nicer to people's CPUs and memory. Whether or not that requires
a re-implemenetation of dpkg or not isn't for me to say since I
Today, Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Previously John Hasler wrote:
Undo.
dpkg will support rollback at some point, when reiserfs supports
transactions.
Even then, I imagine it to be difficult. What about installs that cross
filesystem boundaries, etc. Either you'd have to have
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 11:44:13AM -0500, Adam Lazur wrote:
Dwayne C . Litzenberger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
Relocatable packages so a user can do an individual package install into ~
without being r00t (this may be possible now
will be
required of this project, so I get things done right.
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
That it isn't just a package manager. It should cook the coffee for me.
More importantly:
It should be re-usable as a library for implementing packages/modules
Dwayne C . Litzenberger wrote:
I wrote..
It should be re-usable as a library for implementing packages/modules
for PLs·
Erm, now I'm getting confused. I assume you mean that this package manager
should also be a framework for loadable modules. Isn't that way outside the
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 02:21:51PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 09:52:47AM +0100, Sami Dalouche wrote:
If I had to change something in the Debian package manager, I would
like it to use bzip2 instead of gzip, but this doesn't need a
omplete reimplementation. The
out, it may evolve
into future standard package manager.
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
Cheers
--
Dwayne C. Litzenberger - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.
- See the mail headers for GPG/advertising/homepage information
) and clean as possible. For
now, the work will be strictly academic, but if it works out, it may evolve
into future standard package manager.
So my question is: What do you wish for in a package manager?
the debian packaging system answered most things i want from a
packaging system. what exactly
60 matches
Mail list logo
