[lsb-discuss] Packaging

[PatMorris]

I have been doing a lot of packaging lately, and the thing that keeps
killing me is the dependencies.  I think this needs to be addressed in a
two package management concept. -Pat

On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 21:47 +0200, Alexey Eremenko wrote:
> hi all !
> 
> before I begin lets learn two torms:
> -first package manager (=distro-specific-PM) (=base PM)
> -second package manager (=LSB-PM)
> 
> I thought about package managers recently.
> 
> I think that by converting packages (from second to first, like
> alien), it would be hard to achieve good stability.
> 
> I came to conclusion that second package manager must exist, with only
> few mandatory packages installed already, those are:
> 
> 1. LSB
> 2. LSB-Desktop
> 
> This way, all apps and plugins will be dependent on those 2 packages
> (which must always exists), so this way all normal GUI applications
> (like Photoshop) could be installed easily.
> 
> Now with plugins it is a bit more complex.
> What if you want to install a plugin for FireFox ?
> 
> I think that the second (read third-party) package manager must copy
> it from the first package manager (read the PM, that's included with
> your OS).
> i.e. Re-Register with LSB PM.
> This idea (unlike alien) will not mess the base PM, so at worst case
> your plugin will work after you install manually second copy of
> FireFox.
> 
> So with my approach the max risk is:
> Having 2 copies of FireFox installed side-by-side. (one from LSB PM,
> one from base PM)
> 
> With alien approach the max risk is:
> ending up with messed package manager that refuses to work.
> 
> ===============================================
> WARNING: for Open-Minded people Only !
> Other things to think about:
> 
> 1. Do we need conventional Packages for third party apps ?
> 
> I think something revolutionary such as "klik" is very good.
> i.e. we still need ability to register packages with desktop
> environment and resolve-dependencies of course, but I don't think that
> we absolutely must install packages as we do it with rpm/deb. I think
> just running them uninstalled (like klik) is good idea. (provided we
> can register them in our start menus)
> 
> Bottom Line: We need some technology that has advantages of both klik
> and rpm/deb.
> 
> for those new to the concept:
> Klik allows users to download-and-click on klik packages to run them
> instantly, without installing anything, which is very convenient.
> 
> read more on: klik.atekon.de
> 
> 2. The second PM must be optimized for user-wide setups instead of
> system-wide setups.
> While both rpm & deb allows to install for single user-only by doing
> tricks, this is non-standard procedure.... why is this ?
> 
> In Home environments it is nice to let 2 users install each to his own
> account without messing the rest of the system. ...And make it easy to
> install is important too !
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lsb-discuss mailing list
> lsb-discuss at lists.freestandards.org
> http://lists.freestandards.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss