Re: Autopackage @ LinuxTag in Berlin
Isak Savo <[email protected]> Sun, 3 May 2009 22:13:31 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.autopackage.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Jan Niklas Hasse <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the feedback. Here's the new version: > > Autopackage is a free computer package management system aimed at > making it simple to create a package that can be installed on all > Linux distributions and have that package integrate well into the > desktop environment. It is intended to be used for installing non-core > applications such as word processors, web browsers, and personal > computer games, rather than core libraries and applications. This is good! > Its goal is to make it possible to create only one package for all > kinds of Linux distribution to make software distribution easy for > both developers and users. For example an Autopackage only needs one > package for 32 bit and 64 bit machines. Furthermore binary > compatibility issues are solved using Apbuild, a wrapper around GCC > which makes it possible to solve bogus dependencies and different > versions of glibc. I agree with Mike here, "bogus deps" won't be understood. I suggest staying at a higher level, perhaps: "To help developers create binaries that works across multiple distribution, autopackage includes a tool called APBuild that works around many portability issues that occur during normal compilation" You may even wanna leave out the "during compilation" part > Autopackage is a complementary system to a distribution's usual > packaging system, such as RPM and deb. Since it's possible to install > Autopackages into the home directory without root access it's more > safe to install software from an untrusted source with an Autopackage > rather then the package manager. I suggest you don't include "untrusted" here. It's a big can of worms in that statement (do you trust the program but not the package? - we want them to be the same anyway! Plus: on the average desktop installation, having access to $HOME is just as dangerous as having system wide access. In fact, I personally care more about $HOME than /usr or /etc on my system) Perhaps rephrase to put focus on "it's possible to install without affecting other users on the system" or "installing on systems where you do not have root access". -Isak --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: autopackage-dev-unsubscribe-OfajU3CKLf1/[email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: autopackage-dev-help-OfajU3CKLf1/[email protected]