Peter da Silva wrote: > On 2009-01-01, at 10:05, Michael Poole wrote: >> Honest question: How can one defend the claim that dpkg suffers from >> "meta-package-system-of-the-week" (apt has been around for something >> like a decade) without saying the same about FreeBSD (cvsup, csup, >> freebsd-update, etc -- and ports has even more to worry about)? > > The core functionality that dpkg is missing and apt is supposed to > provide - dependency support - was part of the ports system from the > beginning. And apparently automatic dependency support isn't even > something you want, which I find surprising.
Wait. You're complaining that Debian builds up its functionality in layers rather than in one monolithic tool? And this is somehow hateful? And that Debian doesn't do automatic dependency resolution, what? -- The interface should be as clean as newly fallen snow and its behavior as explicit as Japanese eel porn.
