Re: [SLUG] Re: The joy of APT (was: photo gallery recommendations sought)
On 5/7/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But again a real eg: http://www.ltsp.org lbe used to build, does not NOW. Where were you (in terms of versions) when it DID build. How do I tell my friend that it did build around Marchish with all the latest upgrades, but does not now. Go back to 'then' and it will build. I should let this go but I won't :) I think you're saying that apt-get doesn't cope when you mix managed packages and custom source builds. If you need to a constant base environment to build your packages on then don't update your system. If you want your system to evolve nicely over time then use apt on a consistent package repository and it will. Again it is much cleaner to say 'install RH9, choose DEV environment, add get-text', it works: a repeatable, exact solution for ever. Not really a problem with apt, that's a problem with making changes. How are you adding get-text? However you do it, if you add the wrong version you have the same problem. If you add the right version then if you had run apt against a repository with the right version you'd also be fine. I'm not suggesting that building from a known cd and adding stuff to it to get a standard environment is a bad idea, just that it has nothing to do with whether apt-get is a good tool or paradigm. Again horses for courses: whose building 'that version' of LBE (used by 1000s customers worldwide for POS touch terminals) and needs to continue building THAT version. Then don't change the version. Or create packages that roll nicely with updates. Apt is there so that changes within the packaged environment run smoothly, not so that unpackaged source trees build nicely on it. Seems like criticising a stapler for being a crummy hole punch. Cheers.Steve -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Re: The joy of APT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Again it is much cleaner to say 'install RH9, choose DEV environment, add get-text', it works: a repeatable, exact solution for ever. Again horses for courses: whose building 'that version' of LBE (used by 1000s customers worldwide for POS touch terminals) and needs to continue building THAT version. What you're describing isn't an apt-get artefact, it's a distribution/release one. I don't see how it differs from: Install Debian version 3 release 1. Select development task apt-get install get-text If you're managing Debian machines, you either rely on the standard releases, or you do your own. That way you can precisely reproduce a particular configuration from a particular time. Sure apt-get is cute (easy, nice, etc), but ... apt-get will work cutely, easily, nicely etcely from whatever you point it at. If you point it at the unstable distribution it'll change over time. If you point it at a known configuration it'll always install that, every time. Terry -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
[SLUG] Re: The joy of APT (was: photo gallery recommendations sought)
On 5/6/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Take DammSmallLinux and try to make a development system and (real) soon apt-get gives fatal errors and again 'the bell tower' Isn't that more about the distro/packaging quality/dependencies etc.? (I don't know anything about DamnSmallLinux so this is not intended as a criticism of it) A counter example I could offer would be: take ubuntu hoary, progress through breezy to dapper beta without ever having having to re-install from a cd and without really experiencing any packaging issues. Apt is just a (very nifty) tool, the joy comes from the distro having good practices around the way they organise their packages, dependencies etc. IMHO. Cheers.Steve -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Re: The joy of APT (was: photo gallery recommendations sought)
On Saturday 06 May 2006 23:15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/6/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Take DammSmallLinux and try to make a development system and (real) soon apt-get gives fatal errors and again 'the bell tower' Isn't that more about the distro/packaging quality/dependencies etc.? (I don't know anything about DamnSmallLinux so this is not intended as a criticism of it) A counter example I could offer would be: take ubuntu hoary, progress through breezy to dapper beta without ever having having to re-install from a cd and without really experiencing any packaging issues. Apt is just a (very nifty) tool, the joy comes from the distro having good practices around the way they organise their packages, dependencies etc. IMHO. But again a real eg: http://www.ltsp.org lbe used to build, does not NOW. Where were you (in terms of versions) when it DID build. How do I tell my friend that it did build around Marchish with all the latest upgrades, but does not now. Go back to 'then' and it will build. Again it is much cleaner to say 'install RH9, choose DEV environment, add get-text', it works: a repeatable, exact solution for ever. Again horses for courses: whose building 'that version' of LBE (used by 1000s customers worldwide for POS touch terminals) and needs to continue building THAT version. Sure apt-get is cute (easy, nice, etc), but ... James -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
