Jimmy Tang <[email protected]> writes: > On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Greg Troxel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Without thinking too much, my reaction is that the whole SUMO thing is >> working around broken packaging systems or operating systems without a >> healthy packaging ecosystem. That's fine to do, but it seems odd to >> pull in the source for all the things tahoe depends on into the source >> tree, even by reference. > > Greg: sorry for the duplicate mail, I didn't hit reply-all on my > initial response. > > In general I would agree with your comments, though I have found that > the SUMO build is just plain convenient for when I have access to > machines but not root access to install dependancies, giving me the > capability to run the software in the user land without much hassle.
Agreed (although with pkgsrc I think you can build everything unprivileged in a path in your homedir, but that fails the "too much hassle" test). I didn't mean to say I thought the SUMO build shouldn't exist. Just that it seems like the included bits don't really belong in tahoe vcs.
pgpDIIrxjES1v.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list [email protected] http://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
