On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 12:06:59PM -0700, James Powell wrote:
> It's not just that, but why are there so many broken down packages? -bin, -dev, -meta, -src, -lib, -doc, etc. my God do we need this many? Many distributions use just one all inclusive package to avoid problems unless its a temporary dependency build time only. Yes, I'd say it broken, far worse though that one can realize, and far confusing to some people as well.
>
> If you run "./configure && make && make install" you get an all inclusive package. That's in every handbook and textbook I've read too.
>
> This structured, repurposed, and tiered package system is utter nonsense. There's packages that install nothing but a symlink for crying out loud!
>
> What .deb packages need is simplification, not more convulsion to muck things up and complicate things worse for new uses.

That kind of complexity is usually a sign that there are some missing
concepts, or that essential features have been placed in the wrong
place.

It's maybe time for a comprehensie discussion on what a packaging
system *ought* to do.

For a later release, of course, not Devuan 1.

-- hendrik

> ________________________________
> From: T.J. Duchene<mailto:t.j.duchene@gmail.com>
> Sent: ‎7/‎17/‎2015 11:53 AM
> To: dng@???<mailto:dng@lists.dyne.org>
> Subject: Re: [DNG] dng@???
>
> KatolaZ:
>
> > > > You guys talk about supporting half a dozen init systems like it
> > > > was similar to providing half a dozen different editors, which
> > > > believe me is not quite the case.
>
> hendrik:
>
> > You're arguing for setting up the framework that makes it possible,
> > rather than to do the heavy lifting. It would also provide those who
> > want to make various package-maintainers a path to follow to make
> > their packages suitable for multiple inits, in case they whould
> > choose to do so.
> >
>
> Hi, guys! Just my two cents!
>
>
> Just to be clear, before I say anything else, I am not talking about
> Devuan 1. That's set in stone. As far as the future, I personally
> think that init freedom/flexibility is something that really needs to
> be evaluated, so that Devuan does not fall into the same mono-culture
> trap that Debian has. One of Devuan's key concerns should be the
> avoidance of mono-culture thinking.
>
> I actually read somewhere that Ubuntu is already planning on abandoning
> the Deb format in favor of something new. I wasn't too thrilled with
> the idea at first, but the more I thought about it, the more I am
> convinced that something has to change. Ian Murdoch who
> founded Debian, advocated changing the way things are done (when he
> started Progeny, but because he wasn't the head of Debian he was
> basically ignored). Debian packaging practices NEED to change as needs
> change, and they haven't. Even RedHat has changed their packaging more
> than Debian.
>
> It was packaging that led to Debian's systemd versus S5 fracas
> in the first place. Being a programmer and having packaged software for
> both Debian and RedHat style Linuxes, I see absolutely no reason why it
> is not technically feasible to support multiple init systems. Even if
> you know how to man-handle APT, there are too many longstanding issues
> in Debian packaging that never get any attention at all, because the
> vast majority of the Debian developers always use Sid. There are no
> delta support. There are no (or very few) alternative package chains.
> There are no really reliable methods of rollback for a bad package.
>
> One thing that drives me crazy is that you cannot pull updated
> source code to use on Debian Stable from the other Debian branches for
> a local apt-build without ridiculously convoluted configuration
> (if it works at all). It's actually the lack of any real change in the
> packaging that has started me looking at other Linuxes for a
> replacement.
>
> Debian packaging has become to rigid and inflexible.
>
> Thanks! See you all soon =)
> T.J.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng