[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/10/24]
On 24 Oct 2006, at 04:37, jrodman@xxxx.xxxxxxxxxx.xxx wrote: > > While on the one hand, I think your idea of expecting all programs > to be > in packages of the same name is not a good requirement for a packaging > system, it of course points to the lack of an obvious way to say 'give > me the package that supplies program foo' I think you are absolutely right, but it makes me wonder what the point of a packaging system is if its not to give me program 'foo'. Ok, maybe giving me development library 'foo' works - but that should be an edge case. It's not, I know. Ideally, in the "Linux on every desktop"[1] utopian (dystopian?) vision the environment would be aimed at people who were wanting to get on with using the computer for some task and ignoring the internals/general crap - and if we presented the current idea of a package to these users they'd not put up with the lunacy that we take in our stride - admittedly hating it as we stride onwards. Greg [1] or any other platform where OSS is consumed via a package manager.
Generated at 20:01 on 07 Nov 2006 by mariachi 0.52