summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100928/1234722a/attachment-0001.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100928/1234722a/attachment-0001.html')
-rw-r--r--zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100928/1234722a/attachment-0001.html57
1 files changed, 57 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100928/1234722a/attachment-0001.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100928/1234722a/attachment-0001.html
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..6d945267d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100928/1234722a/attachment-0001.html
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+Doesn&#39;t packagekit provide Gnome and KDE-native interfaces for package management?<div><br></div><div>Shawn<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Richard <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:richard.j.walker@ntlworld.com">richard.j.walker@ntlworld.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
+<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">On Tuesday 28 September 2010 23:42:21 Renaud MICHEL wrote:<br>
+&gt; No, if you are talking about rpmdrake, you should compare it to synaptic.<br>
+&gt; I you want to talk about apt (be it apt-get or aptitude), you should<br>
+&gt; compare it to urpmi, and urpmi (in my opinion) is not slow.<br>
+&gt;<br>
+</div>Agreed. Though I am not by any means a command line junkie I will always use<br>
+uprmi when I know exactly what I want.<br>
+<br>
+So it is synaptic/apt and rpmdrake/urpmi. No doubt yum has a GUI counterpart<br>
+too.<br>
+<div class="im">&gt;<br>
+&gt; emerge and macports are source-based &quot;packet&quot; managers.<br>
+&gt; As the programs are compiled when you want to install them, you can decide<br>
+&gt; to exclude some optional, compile-time functionality, and avoid their<br>
+&gt; dependencies.<br>
+&gt;<br>
+&gt; In pre-compiled packets (like rpm or deb), the packager decided what should<br>
+&gt; be compiled, and so what are the required dependencies.<br>
+&gt; You still have the option to get the source package and tweak it (via the<br>
+&gt; spec file for rpm, or rule for deb) to exclude some things you don&#39;t<br>
+&gt; require. (but you will need to do it again each time an update is<br>
+&gt; available)<br>
+&gt;<br>
+</div>Right, I have done this with a custom ffmpeg build. Compile time dependency<br>
+control is, of course, a grace and favour benefit provided by the program<br>
+author. I get the impression that a packager can introduce depencies when<br>
+special support is needed for extra features he may choose to include. This<br>
+seems to be what happened with the 2010.1 issue of the foobillard rpm where a<br>
+new dependency on Pulse has been created which does not exist in the 2010.0<br>
+package or the author&#39;s source.<br>
+<div class="im">&gt;<br>
+&gt; Packages have dependencies, those are interpreted as &quot;this package cannot<br>
+&gt; work without those&quot;.<br>
+&gt; You can also have less strict recommendations, deb has provided for long<br>
+&gt; recommended packages (not really required, but a must have) and suggested<br>
+&gt; packages (is an interesting addition, but nothing essential).<br>
+&gt; Rpm also provide such a mechanism (though I think is younger than deb) with<br>
+&gt; the suggested packages.<br>
+&gt; Urpmi take the suggested packages into account, when installing it will by<br>
+&gt; default selected also the suggested packages, but you can add the --no-<br>
+&gt; suggests option to avoid this.<br>
+</div>Does this mean that I can find the KDE packages which &quot;depend&quot; on Pulse and<br>
+re-package them such that Pulse is only &quot;recommended&quot;? If so then I will have<br>
+to find the way to set the --no-suggests option in rpmdrake. I hadn&#39;t even<br>
+looked for it before as I have only recently started to discover problems in<br>
+Mandriva packages.<br>
+<div class="im">&gt; On the urpme side, if you uninstall a package that was installed as a<br>
+&gt; suggestion, it won&#39;t trigger the uninstallation of the package that<br>
+&gt; suggested it.<br>
+</div>Something similar seems to apply to packages which I inadvertently &quot;mark&quot; as<br>
+manually installed. urpme reports that such packages will be excluded from<br>
+orphan detection. I love the --auto-orphans switch.<br>
+<font color="#888888"><br>
+Richard<br>
+<br>
+</font></blockquote></div><br></div>