Hi, I would say fdpkg is the more complete package
management frontend, so if you want to modify one
to make the other obsolete, you should instead add
fdupdate functionality to fdpkg ;-). But for me, it
is fine to have both fdpkg and fdupdate. The latter
could make more use of fdpkg, that would make the
fdupdate part simpler so it could focus on other
things...

Eric

Geraldo wrote:

> i would suggest to extend fdupdate as freedos main pkg front end
> all we need to do is add the possibility to create local repos
> i mean, be able to use cd, floppy or whatever as a repo :)
> and of course still use fdpkg and back end...



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Reply via email to