Re: The objectroot FHS
Liam Proven <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.distributions.gobo.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMTenCGAzHh5SCgtsh8Xj2w_NBGdZv9+QoziaLfSNv9AQobFxg@mail.gmail.com> |
On 1 May 2013 18:32, Trans <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Sepero <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hey Trans. Perhaps it would be possible to use the deb package format. It >> would likely appeal to more people. >> > > I have thought about that myself. It is tempting b/c of how mature the dpkg > system is. But, to handle the differences in installation locations and > index linking That's the biggie. The .deb format assumes that stuff goes in all the usual Unixy places, exactly what Gobo is getting away from. *But* don't assume that APT is wedded to DPKG. It isn't. DPKG handles the .debs. APT handles DPKG. It can handle other things, too: http://apt4rpm.sourceforge.net/ I've used this on SUSE. It was pretty good. SUSE were fools for not adopting it officially - it is way better than YAST and I think that a million Debian users would consider it streets ahead of either YUM or URPMI, the 2 leading auto-dependency-handling tools for RPM. Forget .deb, just consider APT as a front-end to an underlying Gobo-like packaging tool, which given the much more compartmentalised tree, could be considerably simpler than any existing packaging system... Whereas on the top, you could still have Synaptic or whatever. -- Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile Email: [email protected] • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven MSN: [email protected] • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884