A Suggestion For A Simple Package Manager
Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net
Thu Mar 19 01:22:19 PDT 2009
DJ Lucas wrote:
> Unfortunately, you'd need to do the same with cp, ln, mkdir, mknod, mv,
> rename, rm, etc. Suddenly, the approach by installwatch, CheckInstall,
> and other like approaches, makes quite a bit more sense.
I don't recall saying that those approaches didn't make sense.
I also didn't recommend modifying "install".
I said it makes more sense to modify "install" than it does
to modify "make". Modifying either tool doesn't really appeal
> Additionally, there is a reason that the vast majority of makefiles
> today support DESTDIR. The following is what I (and others) have
> proposed several times for the book. We simply install to the DESTDIR
I've used similar techniques in order to find what to put into
the %files section of RPM spec files.
> In this manor, we've managed to explain the complexities of PM, give
> real examples, and still avoid using any particular PM by default.
> Dependencies are already covered by the book, the only thing left is
> upgrading. Concerning upgrades, Perl (specifically perldoc) is the only
Version control, dependency management, and package management
are not simple, and doing them by hand is prone to mistakes, and
vastly unappealing to me. I've been doing it for over twenty
years with a variety of tools, some expensive, some not, and
I have yet to find one which does everything one needs in a simple
and easy to use manner.
I think this thread is likely reaching the end of its useful life.
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
More information about the lfs-support