[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Installer.app feedback
From: |
Rogelio M . Serrano Jr . |
Subject: |
Re: Installer.app feedback |
Date: |
Wed, 23 Jun 2004 23:01:07 +0800 |
NEXT format? Im sorry im new to NEXTish things but where can i find info on
that? Maybe that is enough. Im using a simple cpio.bz2 packaging myself and it
is good enough for my needs.
On 2004-06-23 21:39:35 +0800 Frederico Muñoz <fsmunoz@gesal.org> wrote:
> On 2004-06-23 14:31:03 +0100 Björn Giesler <giesler@ira.uka.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 23.06.2004 um 15:05 schrieb Frederico Muñoz:
>>> The main idea - and what is actually already done - is this: for each
>>> packaging format there is a bundle.
>>
>> Does that mean that the installer handles different packaging formats, such
>> as .deb, .rpm etc.?
>>
>
> Yes. The idea is to cope with the native package format. This only for the
> package installation part (i.e. this is the same as using dpkg or rpm, *not*
> the same as using apt or yum or urpmi).
>
>> Your proposal sounds reasonable; however: Since GNUstep is a software
>> system that has no need for the complicated packaging convolutions that
>> traditional Unix software needs, and is quite distinct from the surrounding
>> Unix/Windows environment, wouldn't it be more sound to leave RPMs etc.
>> quite alone and create a much simpler format just for GNUstep?
>>
>
> Well, that could be an option. I actually have a bundle that handles .pkg
> packages based on the simple NeXT format, but I made that only for testing
> the application. The problem with this is the one that always appears on
> discussions of this kind: some people want GNUstep to have the possibility to
> behave as a Desktop/OS, other people as a development framework. Several
> people told me to *not* create yeat another packaing format for GNUstep,
> instead use the one in the system.
>
> I have to admit that I share somewaht the same view concerning this matter...
> as soon as the base GNUstep framework is installed GNUstep applications and
> frameworks could be dealt with internally. But I know that most people don't
> think this way, so having the bundle system could be the best way to go: in
> the event that GNUstep adopts some kind of packaging it can be easily adopted
> by Installer, and it can also integrate with the underlying packaging system.
>
> Thanks you for your feedback,
>
> best regards,
>
> Frederico Muñoz
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnustep mailing list
> Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
>
Re: Installer.app feedback, Peter Cooper, 2004/06/23