Compatability with FreeBSD Ports [debian package tools]
Erik P. Skaalerud
erik at pentadon.com
Wed Aug 17 12:54:32 PDT 2005
> <4303571D.9050306 at xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <43036a16$0$739$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: <43036a16$0$739$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Message-ID: <430395f8$0$741$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Trace: 1124308472 crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org 741 184.108.40.206
Xref: crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org dragonfly.users:3862
As Joerg said earlier, why not rather look at _why_ people love to use
apt instead of pkg_*?
Can't we just try to make our own packaging system (like apt wich is
easy to use) wich could perhaps use packages as primary medium, but yet
provide a posibillity to compile software like we do with ports/pkgsrc?
It's just a matter of specifying in a repo that XYZ package cannot be
distrubuted binary, so it will just auto-default to compile it. And if
"power users" wants to compile their own software, they can do that if
they want to by turning on a compile-default flag instead of a standard
binary-default flag (with being able to use flags like we already do in
I dont know about you other guys, but a system like this would be a
dream for me.
More information about the Users