Compatability with FreeBSD Ports [debian package tools]
joerg at britannica.bec.de
Thu Aug 18 09:20:32 PDT 2005
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 05:45:14PM +0200, Raphael Marmier wrote:
> >The reason why this is not used by default for normal system
> >distribution is the high amount of redundancy and that not every
> >dependency just works out of the box. As soon as a library needs a
> >config file itself, you have to break the sandbox and you loose most
> >advantages in that case.
> I'm not sure I understand. The config would go in the sandbox as well in
> a ./etc directory. Of course, it has the potential of duplicating
> configs as well.
Exactly that is the problem. As user and administrator it is the worst
case to have multiple configuration files for the same thing. You chance
something in one place and forget to change it somewhere else. A month
later you wonder why something is broken :-)
> I've just come to think that such a system would fit nicely into the
> DragonflyBSD attitude to "simplify to scale".
Again, it is a nice thing for big programs you don't want to update or
can't update regulary. OOo would be a good candidate for this. For the
rest, it doesn't pay off.
More information about the Users