banibrata.dutta at gmail.com
Sun Sep 21 07:31:15 CEST 2008
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 10:27 AM, Noufal Ibrahim <noufal at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Kiran Jonnalagadda <jace at pobox.com>wrote:
>> On 20-Sep-08, at 10:25 PM, Noufal Ibrahim wrote:
>> This does have some 'limitations' though. There are a lot of people who
>>> just want to run their 'applications' without dependency problems and such.
>>> Being able to 'bundle' your software along with everything it needs into one
>>> binary blob is what some people want to do.
>> That is why Linux software is distributed as DEB or RPM packages where the
>> OS takes care of all the dependencies during installation.
> Yes but those are specific to Debian/Ubuntu or Redhat/Fedora. These are
> fine for real sysads but many people don't really know/want to know about
> package management systems.
> It would be nice to have one file which I can download and 'install' in
> some sense (perhaps without root privileges). Something like
> http://0install.net/ or autopackage (http://autopackage.org/). Similar to
> windows. Download, double click, click a few "nexts" and you have a working
> app (as opposed to, add a line to the apt.sources list, update, install
> cycle on Debian).
That's a good point. Actually, dependency fulfillment is a nightmare the
moment you step outside the realm of --
1) Do it right -- "always", i.e. install only from official distro, install
packages only from official distro-stream, and always do so, without
2) Internet connected (or repository connected) systems, where rule-1 is
Those 2 are "ideal" ways (probably) of maintaining software, but the weakest
link are not the software packages (installed on the system) that adhere to
those, but those that don't.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the BangPypers