Re: mega-package rather than sumo tarball
>>>> "mb" == Martin Buchholz
<martin(a)xemacs.org> writes:
>>>> "Jan" == Jan Vroonhof
<vroonhof(a)math.ethz.ch> writes:
Jan> Richard Coleman
<coleman(a)math.gatech.edu> writes:
>> I was thinking that when 21.0 is released, it might be
better
>> to have a mega-package (union of all common binary packages)
>> rather than a sumo tarball.
Jan> I thought the SUMO tarball was exactly that?
mb> Richard's point is that the SUMO tarball is not actually a
mb> package itself, but a different sort of animal. Package
mb> manipulation commands, for example, don't work on it (unless
mb> your only package manipulation tool is `tar').
This is related to the oft-expressed desire for better runtime
dependency tracking. Ie, Richard's megapackage could be implemented
as a virtual package depending on the common binary packages.
Where's karlheg when we need him? :-)
--
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
What are those two straight lines for? "Free software rules."