robert w hall wrote:
> (I respond to this thread with some trepidation 'cos we're getting
> horribly OT, but)
Yes, we are. I was thinking yesterday that this was one thread
that Netraverse could safely ignore, but there you go... I was
wrong about that.
> underneath all this joshing there is a serious point:-
> Slack with its 'non'-packaging and other lack of 'advanced' features
> encourages an intelligent and flexible approach to installation and use.
It'll let you shoot yourself in the foot, running ldd on binaries
to figure out what library you're missing.
> I doubt that a dependencies-based package manager (eg rpm with deps
> enabled) would ever for example let you install win4lin on a tiny
> slack4.0 system (libc5-based) - where I'm using libc2.0.7pre6 as the
> glibc library!
Why would it? The binary won't work, so is netraverse better off
answering all the resulting flaming questions about why it's
broken? A proper package management system would declare the
conflict and/or offer to install the new glibc library at the
same time.
> Without such flexibility we're all condemned ultimately to blindly
> install larger and larger suites on bigger and bigger machines - the
> microsoft mindset revisited
Huh? Unrelated. Dependencies do not make the system bigger or
bloated. Contrary to your belief, package management that deals
with dependencies correctly does not dumb down users. It does
however allow us to produce a working distribution of 5000
interconnected packages.
Peter
_______________________________________________
Win4Lin-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.netraverse.com/mailman/listinfo/win4lin-users
