blfs software management response from pkgutils author
rohde.henning at gmx.net
Fri Nov 2 08:13:13 PST 2001
thank you for resolving my concerns!
Mike B. wrote:
>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Mike Bedwell wrote:
>> > -> I'd like to get some information from the author of pkgtools about:
>> > - future plans regarding CRUX & pkgutils
>> > - general availiability of the sources of pkgutils
>> > - agreement that it's ready for wider usage
>> I haven't made a separate homepage for pkgutils yet, but there will be in
>> the future. The reason that I haven't done that yet is that pkgutils has
>> been CRUX only so far I didn't think there would really be much interest
>> in it outside of CRUX. Another reason is that pkgutils is still evolving
>> somewhat. I'm planing to do some redesign of the database layout and I've
>> already (in a still not yet released version) implemented automatic
>> downloading capabilities to pkgmk which has a slight impact on the
>> pkg.build files. After these things have been implemented and tested I'll
>> consider the pkg.build format stable and pkgutils ready for wider use.
>> There is no time plan for this, but it's not that far away (a month
OK, that's nice, my objections against this tool, taken for itself, have
But doesn't a pkg.build-file contain the same information ALFS uses for
their profiles? -> doubled / redundant work? Shouldn't we syncronize our
Pkgutils really look nice and definitely usefull, but after serious
considerations I've changed my oppinion regarding a general adoption:
IMHO we should not split with ALFS at the way we store information that's
used for a automatic compilation and installation of any software.
As long as ALFS has not yet stabilized, regarding the way and structure
they use for their profiles, it may be too early for these concerns to
hinder our usage of any tool for software-management.
So IMHO it should be everyones private decision if he needs a tool for
software-management, personally I do disagree that this tool would be the
Just my EUR 0.02, I'd like to exchange them with some USD 0.02, ;-)
PS: I think that this is not a matter of blfs.support but blfs.dev, I've
activated a F'up to blfs.dev!
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the blfs-dev