> A package manager's main duty is to handle repositories and
> dependencies. If we're looking at nothing more than management of
> local binaries then yes, systems without it get along fine. But if you
> look at the bigger picture it becomes obvious why a package manager is
> necessary and isn't just for "systems that are already a mess." This
> is called putting things in context.
Interestingly I know of two binary package dependencies in all the
packages we have.
Everything depends on the kernel, abaco depends on webfs, and thats it;
not having shared libraries saves us from much dependency misery.
There are a few sourcecode dependencies (one contrib needs another
in order to compile), but these are reported when you install or pull
such a package by the contrib software.
The bottom line on the package managment is the same as most protracted
debates on 9fans:
if you don't like whats there change or replace it. if its better people
will migrate to it, if not it will be orphaned. If you just talk and
write
no code you will be ignored.
This is not a threat, just a statment of how 9fans works.
-Steve
