On 2011-06-19 21:59, Jose Armando Garcia wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Jacob Carlborg<d...@me.com>  wrote:
On 2011-06-19 19:02, Johannes Pfau wrote:

I still don't understand that completely. So does it list the files
which will be contained in the package later, or file dependencies
contained in other packages?
(I'm asking because I'm not familiar
with file-dependencies in package management systems. Most package
management systems make a package depend on other packages, but not on
the files in the packages)

Ok, let me explain. When developing a package management system the first
thing one has do decide is if the package should contain pre-built
binaries/libraries, we can call these binary packages, or the necessary
files to build the package when installing, we can call these source package
(not to be confused with the source type you've mentioned below). As a third
option, one could have a mixed package system containing both binary and
source packages. Maybe even mixed packages could be possible.

Why decide on "file" package? This only works with packages that can
be compiled. Think non-D source code packages and close source
packages. Even one of the most commonly known "file" package manager
(Gentoo's portage) allows for binary packages.

I guess we could have a mixed system, with both source and binary packages.

Another example is caching. Many software development organization
keep internal library/program repository that have been clear by the
organization for many reasons (e.g. licensing, security, support,
etc). Our packaging solution should work such an environment.

-Jose


--
/Jacob Carlborg

Reply via email to