On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:43:24 -0400 Anshuman Aggarwal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Ricardo, this is similar to what we're thinking just that this > uses files and the approach we're considering is symbolic links... I agree that symlinks seem to be the best choice. > > I haven't used FreeBSD much but I think the question here is how does > it maintain the +REQUIRED_BY ? Does each program edit these files and > add their dependencies ? It depends on how do you install/upgrade/remove packages. Usually you're either using pkg_add/pkg_delete, or the ports itself (even indirectly with a frontend app, like portupgrade, portmaster, ...). Those are very UNIX-oriented, in the sense that they'll use base tools, like sed/grep and friends. > > ....this isn't a bad mechanism for storing the info, the solution I am > working on is similar but uses symbolic links so we should be able to > just remove the broken links to remove the programs from the list.... I think that what you propose is equivalent, only looks different. It may have some penalties (crowded directory for, say, glibc), but still it is very clean. If you had the time, I'd suggest that you create an artificial corner case, where some package is required by tons of others (like 10k). Of course, this is an extreme case, but in 10-20 years, who knows? In the near future, someone will ask you if the solution scales, and he/she will surely be surprised that you know it beforehand---specially if it does scale. Regards. -- Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by FreeBSD "Left to themselves, things tend to go from bad to worse." _______________________________________________ gobolinux-devel mailing list gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
