On 7/19/05, Dan Winship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 11:31 -0400, Luis Villa wrote: > > On 7/19/05, Alexander Larsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The naming of the packages could also be such that there is no chance of > > > conflicting with your vendor gnome, current version or later installed. > > > > I think Dan was suggesting (and certainly it is easier to produce) > > something that isn't a package at all, just a tarball of binaries and > > magic files, built into /opt/. > > Real packages have a few benefits: > * Can be installed with tools that the user is more likely to be > familiar with (and in particular, can be easily installed with > GUI tools on many distros) > * Easy to remove, easy to upgrade without worrying about there > being cruft left behind > > But they don't need to be "good" packages in terms of integrating with > the rest of the distro. These are the sort of packages that can be > produced in 10 seconds given a tarball and a perl script.
oh, oh. hadn't thought of that. Hrm, yeah, probably doable. > > [Note that if done well, I don't actually think distributing packages > > that conflict with your vendor GNOME is a problem, given proper > > warning labels all over the place.] > > That requires more distro-specific smarts though, Oh, of course. That's why this task drove Jacob insane. :) Luis _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
