dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread dE .
Hello everyone. Since dpkg is originally a part of Debian, I thought why not give this advice here. I think this advice has been talked about quiet a lot, but I did not find any except one, so decided to report it. A problem comes for people who apparently think that Debian based distributions

Proposing removal of pump: anyone wants it?

2010-01-05 Thread David Paleino
Hello people, while hacking on wicd, I looked at the various DHCP clients we have in Debian. I believe that pump could be removed from our archives, but I'm sending this mail in case anyone really needs it -- in this case, we keep it and I'll just remove support for it from wicd. The first

Re: Proposing removal of pump: anyone wants it?

2010-01-05 Thread Paul Wise
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 5:14 PM, David Paleino da...@debian.org wrote: The first issue is: pump has no upstream. debian/copyright shows the source was taken from Fedora Core [1] (reports 404) -- now that it changed name, the new url seems to be [2], and there's no trace of pump there. The last

Re: Proposing removal of pump: anyone wants it?

2010-01-05 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010, David Paleino wrote: while hacking on wicd, I looked at the various DHCP clients we have in Debian. I believe that pump could be removed from our archives, but I'm sending this mail in case anyone really needs it -- in this case, we keep it and I'll just remove support

Re: Proposing removal of pump: anyone wants it?

2010-01-05 Thread David Paleino
Paul Wise wrote: On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 5:14 PM, David Paleino da...@debian.org wrote: The first issue is: pump has no upstream. debian/copyright shows the source was taken from Fedora Core [1] (reports 404) -- now that it changed name, the new url seems to be [2], and there's no trace of

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread Tapio Lehtonen
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 01:55:34PM +0530, dE . wrote: Hello everyone. Since dpkg is originally a part of Debian, I thought why not give this advice here. I think this advice has been talked about quiet a lot, but I did not find any except one, so decided to report it. A problem comes for

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread Bernhard R. Link
* dE . de.tec...@gmail.com [100105 09:26]: A problem comes for people who apparently think that Debian based distributions or Linux in general is useless when it comes to software installation without the internet. Well...yes, software installation can be done offline with apt, but it's not

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread dE .
Even with apt-offline, people have to use this third party program to generate information about his/her/both Debian system, then goto a system with an internet connection, download the packages and install it in their system...as compared to a simple click and install; this is way harder for the

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread dE .
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Bernhard R. Link brl...@debian.org wrote: * dE . de.tec...@gmail.com [100105 09:26]: A problem comes for people who apparently think that Debian based distributions or Linux in general is useless when it comes to software installation without the internet.

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread dE .
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Eugene V. Lyubimkin jackyf.de...@gmail.com wrote: [ moved to debian-dpkg, debian-project is for non-technical stuff ] Bernhard R. Link wrote: Which problem? dpkg is quite good in that regard: just give it a number of .deb files to install and unless there are

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread Martin Wuertele
Hi dE! * dE . de.tec...@gmail.com [2010-01-05 12:13]: The developers and administrators will have to understand my point. This is the only reason why people refuse to install any Linux OS. I really don't have an answer to these simple windows users when they say what about offline software

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread Michael Gilbert
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:55:34 +0530, dE . wrote: The solution that I'm proposing is a super dep package. A single 'sdebp' file which's suppose to install a singe software (mostly a meta package for e.g kde) but contains all dependencies which might be required by the package relative to a fresh

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread Steffen Moeller
Hello, dE . wrote: The solution that I'm proposing is a super dep package. A single 'sdebp' file which's suppose to install a singe software (mostly a meta package for e.g kde) but contains all dependencies which might be required by the package relative to a fresh OS install. A command to

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread Roger Leigh
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 12:50:33PM +0100, Martin Wuertele wrote: Hi dE! * dE . de.tec...@gmail.com [2010-01-05 12:13]: The developers and administrators will have to understand my point. This is the only reason why people refuse to install any Linux OS. I really don't have an answer

Re: dpkg feature implementation

2010-01-05 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 06:59:40PM +0530, dE . wrote: Problem is you have to make these DVD/CD, or in general storage media. Windows people are not willing to do that...they just want click and install. You want people to be able to install packages without a network, and without using