Brian Aker wrote: > Hi! > > On Aug 18, 2008, at 9:42 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > >>> Dynamic builds are sometimes a nightmare to align with dependencies on >>> different flavors of Linux. >> >> I hear this... but perhaps if compiling and making a binary tarball >> isn't as painful as it is now, it wouldn't be as bad to make a binary >> tarball for a specific box... > > To me the answer is not how to get all of the Linux distributions to > learn to work with what we package, but instead package to their native > types. At least for RPMS this solves the problem. Whenever I hear > someone complain about "dependency hell" for distributions. It makes me > happy that they do software engineering instead of jet repair. > > "Hey, watch this, the part fit! Good to fly!" > > There is a rat hole you go down when building static binaries, since the > next leap you make is either "write everything yourself so that you can > control it" or "package up all of the libraries you link too". > > For certain platforms with immature packaging systems you have no > choice, but those are thankfully minority platforms with the exception > of FreeBSD/OSX. Of course Solaris has a package system, but I have not > met anyone who knows it :)
Mats seems to! He is now officially our Solaris PKG expert! _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
