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