On 9/21/07, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Elyess ZOUAGHI wrote:
> > personnaly i dont want to have a
> > complete package like gambas installed because i only need its runtime
> > and this goes for very other packages.
> >
> >
> Is this going to end up with a whole heap of foo-dev packages like what
> happens on other distributions... I gave up on some distributions
> because I was getting annoyed with that.  Perhaps I was just too stupid
> to remember to install them!
>
> I do see this extension to makepkg as a possible way to automatically
> fix one of the oldest bugs in the database -
> http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/3459 .

I've read this bug and noticed that a common problem many users have
in this list is the idea of having -dev, -doc or -whatever packages
that need to be fetched.

What if we could add a way that the -dev, -doc, -* packages are really
sub-packages, instead of a different package. And one could have a
list of standardized sub packages he wants to always install ?

That way (if we can find a simple way of doing this) a user could set
a pacman config flag that says it always want to install, even when
not directly needed by some dependency, so a user that wants all the
devs can add the dev option and have it behave (with split packages)
just like it is now.

I would surely like having split packages but I have to agree that
many users will be unhappy with having to fetch different packages for
dev and stuff like that.

I just believe we should investigate more the idea of true
sub-packages (much like in Windows' .msi files, the way you can
install parts of a software) instead of simply generating more
packages without real connection between them.

>
> Allan
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
>

_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch

Reply via email to