Re: Hating up2date

[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/10/24]

From: Greg McCarroll
Subject: Re: Hating up2date
Date: 04:55 on 24 Oct 2006
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