[nSLUG] Upgrade tools, or... (choosing a new distribution)

Daniel Morrison draker at gmail.com
Tue Sep 11 23:47:53 ADT 2007

On 11/09/2007, Jeff Warnica <jeff at coherentnetworksolutions.com> wrote:

> "Slackware is stable because it uses stable packages". Well, duh.

You're right; it has nothing to do with package management; I shouldn't
have mentioned it.

> Suggesting that the best way to handle dependencies is to ignore them,
> from a system design perspective, is just wrong.

Don't want to have a big argument. For a huge repository of packages such
as Debian's, you're probably correct.  For Slackware, I don't think so.
It's important to keep your system's design simple.  Package management is
complex.  Slackware works fine -- and more simply -- without it.

> I /can/ usually figure out why configure fails. But most of the time, I
> have real work to do.

That's two people equating ./configure failures as the only alternative to
package dependency management.  Why?  I prefer to read the documentation,
and evaluate beforehand whether I can easily meet the prerequisites or
not.  Or just let someone else (third-party packager) do it for me.

> While we can debate the relative quality of PM
> tools - and PM infrastructure/culture - a PM system that gets you 90% of
> the way there is infinitely better then none at all. And of those
> discussed today, they all are better then 90%.

If you say so...


More information about the nSLUG mailing list