At 9:34 Uhr -0400 15.04.2002, David R. Morrison wrote: >Max Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> At 17:58 Uhr -0400 14.04.2002, David R. Morrison wrote: >> >I'd like to broaden the discussion a bit, by introducing another class of >> >.app's which I think we might have in the future: Foo.app which provides >> >an Aqua interface to some open-source package (which itself depends on >> >many other packages) that can be installed by Fink. In this case, I >> >would argue that some kind of interaction with Fink is desirable, because >> >Foo.app would want to query the Debian database when it is being installed, >> >and on the other hand, we would want Fink to complain about removing the >> >dependent packages if Foo.app was still installed. >> > > >[snip] > >> >OK, maybe not so elegant, but I hope the point is clear. >> >> Not really. I understand what you explain above. But it doesn't >> justify packaging the .app in the first place, it only describes an >> ugly (no offense meant) way to hack around a problem that stems from >> the fact that we abuse Fink/dpkg for something it wasn't meant to do >> :-) >> >> If I write say a wrapper around wget - well, I will have to check for >> it's presence anyway, why should I tie myself to Fink ? Please name >> me some real case scenarios, and why making the .app Fink based there >> would be an advantage. I don't like discussion this based on purely >> theoretical setups. >> > >OK, here's a real example, although I am not terribly familiar with it >yet. There is something called cocoAspell.app, which is based on the >open-source Aspell and pspell libraries. This is more than just a wrapper: >apparently there is some notion of plug-in in cocoa and this thing offers >itself as a plug-in spell-checker to any cocoa app that wants one, but does >the actually spell-checking task by relying on the open-source libraries.
So it's a plugin for the spell checker system in OS X (I have written such one in the past). It's not an app that is to be mvoed around or used by the user, but rather a background task which has to be installed in a specific dir anyway (or rather, in one of several specific dirs, namely a subdir of either /System/Library (evil), /Library, /Network/Library or ~/Library). AS such, it's a bad example :-) >Now at the moment, the cocoAspell author is either linking against the >static libraries or possibly packaging a dynamic library within his .app >bundle (I'm not sure which). This is fine, of course. > >The argument for making such things part of Fink is the same argument for >making a coordinated distribution in the first place: let everyone who >wants to link to a particular library do so, and maintain that library >separately from the apps that link to it. Otherwise, every developer needs >to keep track of changes in the libraries and package them all >(redundantly) with his or her own apps. Well, but he has to do that anyway, for the many users that will want to use it w/o using Fink. Max -- ----------------------------------------------- Max Horn Software Developer email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> phone: (+49) 6151-494890 _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
