On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 02:05:34 -0600, Yfrwlf wrote: > On 01/20/2012 04:53 PM, Dennis Nezic wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:50:03 -0600, Yfrwlf wrote: > >> On 01/20/2012 03:26 PM, Dennis Nezic wrote: > >>> On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:12:24 -0600, Yfrwlf wrote: > >>>> On 01/20/2012 10:05 AM, Evan Daniel wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Yfrwlf<yfr...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> On 01/20/2012 07:05 AM, Dennis Nezic wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 22:10:39 +1300, Austin wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Originally tried the JavaWebStart installer, and had problems > >>>>>> with disk space. Moved /usr/local to a bigger partition, then > >>>>>> downloaded the offline installer: > >>>>>> http://freenet.googlecode.com/files/new_installer_offline_1405.jar > >>>>>> as per the web site instructions; also the sig file > >>>>>> new_installer_offline_1405.jar.sig which I verified with gpg. > >>>>>> Then ran > >>>>>> java -jar new_installer_offline.jar > >>>>>> All went OK until Processing step 2/15, "Setting the Updater > >>>>>> up", which reported "Process execution failed" and asked > >>>>>> "Continue Anyway?". I continued, but every step after that > >>>>>> failed. Cleared out the target directory and tried again, same > >>>>>> result. Can't find any installation log, is there one > >>>>>> somewhere? Grateful for any suggestions as to what to try next. > >>>>>> System is Debian Linux 2.6, amd64 (Intel i7 870), 8GB RAM. > >>>>>> Java OpenJDK 1.6.0_18 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> (Side note: Why isn't there a debian package for freenet yet?) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Well with the only dependency being Java I could understand why > >>>>>> there are no packages. If there needed to be though it should > >>>>>> be Zero Install so that it's cross-distro and cross-platform. > >>>>> Using Zero Install won't make it so I can "apt-get install > >>>>> freenet". That needs a Debian package, hosted on the Debian > >>>>> repositories. The request is for a Debian package on Debian > >>>>> repos, not to make it easier to install Freenet on Debian. > >>>>> > >>>>> Evan > >>>> Okay. Developers would love to not have to spend the time > >>>> making a package for every distro and distro verison though, and > >>>> running "0launch<program's url>" to download and run a program > >>>> from the command line is an option, though not as simple, but > >>>> hopefully after it gets a software store for ZI collections that > >>>> will become an option as well. > >>> The whole point of community distros is precisely to help program > >>> developers in this regard. Gentoo users, for example, maintain a > >>> freenet package completely on their own. It seems like you're > >>> trying to wish away the whole concept of distros. (Actually, > >>> trying to impose your own preferred > >>> yet-another-package-manager :p.) > >> Yes, everyone loves re-packaging the same program over and over and > >> over again, tons of fun. :P > >> > >> ZI is a package manager that can run on top of or beside existing > >> package managers because it allows co-existence with other package > >> managers. You can install it on any distro. That makes it one of > >> the few cross-distro and cross-platform (Mac, Windows, BSD etc too) > >> package managers out there, and thus much more capable of becoming > >> a real actual god-forbid Linux standard to allow users and > >> developers more freedom to share programs. > >> > >> So, your proposition that it's useless is totally absurd. Why > >> anyone would go "yessss I have to make 50 billion different > >> packages for the same program because there are no standards!" is > >> totally beyond my comprehension. There is no actual justification > >> for having multiple formats/standards/managers. You want to > >> choose one standardized system, and then throw all the features > >> you need into the managers which are compatible with that system. > >> [snip] > > From my perspective, it is useless. I already have a great package > > manager, and a freenet package. You also don't seem to understand > > the purpose of different linux distributions. The reason you need > > "50 billion different packages for the same program", is the same > > reason "50 billion" linux distros exist, and the same reason why > > having a single standard is quite naive and absurd -- people are > > different. (Decentralization and independent testing that distros > > provide are also invaluable.) (Open-source) program developers > > should not be in the business of distribution. > > > > Anywho, the point is there really should exist "apt-get freenet" by > > now. And "0launch freenetwhatever" too :P. > You can have different bundles of software on ISOs, and even programs > with different default configurations, that's good and I have no > problem with that.
You are naively assuming the only difference between packages is configuration files. That's simply not the case. Some people would like to compile packages to minimize size. Other people to maximize speed. Still other people for other special reasons. Believe it or not, things are the way they currently are for valid reasons. > That has no bearing whatsoever though on having a standardized > package management solution. In terms of practical importance, standardized packages are waay down on the priority list. The reason a debian freenet package doesn't yet exist has very little to do with a lack of standardized package management -- but rather, probably, with not enough debian users. (And, probably with the unfriendly way freenet is currently (or was) packaged -- which, like you, seems to want to pretend that distros don't exist.) > You can have both, at the same time. Different packages are just > different file formats. All that is needed is standardizing on either > one format, or making the package managers compatible with the most > common formats. Wrong. > The problem is the existing common formats like DEB and RPM are too > stupid and not set up right. They lack the flexibility to be able to > do things like installing multiple versions of the same library or > the same program side-by-side, one of the causes of the syndrome of > "Thou shalt only install ONE version of Firefox! If you want a newer > one, upgrade your entire OS!", which is just ludicrous. The point is, > all *sorts* of hell is caused because of the Linux packaging mess, > and it effects both devs and users in harmful ways. You standardize > on an intelligent, featureful system, and everybody wins. Gentoo allows that. Gentoo is also 100% completely customizable to fit even the most esoteric tastes. It even supports pre-compiled binary packages. Why aren't you using it, then? > The Linux community above all others should care about freedom, and > standards provide freedom. Oh gawd. "Freedom" has to be the most abused word/concept evar. (I suppose holocaust jews in fact had more freedom than modern westerners... to think and meditate and lose weight :P.) > Or would you rather everyone not be able to communicate with others > on the Internet because no one can agree on HTML standards? Just an > example of how standards, when done right, provide freedom. Nothing is stopping anyone from agreeing on a standard. You seem to want to coerce people into settling for your particular brand, just for the sake of uniformity. _______________________________________________ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
