apt-get

[Jon Allen]

Can you quantify what makes something apt-get-like?

-Jon

P.S.  I really appreciate that DragonFly seems to be going somewhere (new)
with an eye to doing it "right".

Matthew Dillon wrote:

>     Lets just call it a 'lively debate'.  apt-get may not be perfect (and
>     keep in mind that what I am considering is using the framework, not
>     using Debian's packages).  But apt-get is certainly a whole lot better
>     then the FreeBSD ports system.
> 
>     I think we know that what we want is 'apt-get-like'.  Not necessarily
>     apt-get itself, but something that works along the same lines.
> 
> -Matt
> Matthew Dillon
> <dillon at xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> :El Sun, 30 May 2004 02:14:53 +0200 Michel Talon <talon at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> :escribió:
> :
> :> Yes this wonderful mechanism ensures that the so called stable system
> :> is 3 years old, the unstable sytem periodically bombs out, and the
> :> testing
> :> system is not much better.  Add to that the perpetual politics
> :> nightmare that the Debian people are so fond of, and you get the
> :> present fiasco of the "Sarge release" delayed because it is not free
> :> enough ...
> :
> :/me smells flamewar.
> :
> :Basing about debian will get nowhere, and it does not solve ports' own
> :issues.
> :
> :That apt has been a success is a fact. That your friend lost KDE (and
> :well, apt does allow the user to handle those issues and stop/hold
> :updates for those given packages so your friend's problem was very
> :probably a strong case of RTFM) is not a reason to forget thousands of
> :happy sysadmins that have found in apt a very reliable tool which has
> :been the best package system for years (and still it is, altough just in
> :my humble opinion) just because "it works". Now things can be improved,
> :certainly. Like in FBSD ports...
> :
> :Whatever dfly uses, I'm happy that is being considered by its technical
> :merits, and not rejected just because it's GPL, which is certainly a
> :sign of dfly sanity :)
> :
> :Diego Calleja