On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 03:19:23PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote: > On 29-Aug-01, 12:18 (CDT), Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Previously Steve Greenland wrote: > > > I also think the standalone .deb argument is pretty bogus. > > > > I disagree. A standalone .deb should never be less useful to people then > > one that is in some archive. > > How is it less useful? > > A standalone .deb w/o a Package file doesn't integrate into apt or > dselect, so there's no where to show the descriptions. The only reason > one would have an interest in such a .deb is that one already has a > pretty good idea of what it is, presumably from an accompaning README, > or the webpage with a link, or somesuch. I doubt very many people go > around browsing random .debs with 'dpkg-deb -I'.
Who's to say that a more featureful frontend won't be able to deal with individual .debs just as elegantly? In the webpage-download scenario, I imagine it's pretty common for users to find software on pages that are (entirely or partially) not in their native language, and in that situation a translated description could be quite useful. -- - mdz
