Re: To package or not to package (Was: [tlug] Well now I'm hosed - Dapper/Edgy died)

[Godwin Stewart <godwin.stewart@example.com>]

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 09:04:49 +0900, "Josh Glover" <jmglov@example.com>
wrote:

> The big advantage of a source-based distro to me, both as a sysadmin
> and a desktop user, is that I have control over compile-time feature
> selection. This helps prevent big dependency nightmares.

My reasons for using a source-based distro(*) are pretty much identical
to yours but with another aspect that seems to have been overlooked:
the dreaded "-devel package" syndrome. I wouldn't have to work if I was
given a penny every time I heard/read something like "I installed
package foo but when I try to compile bar that needs it, I'm told that
foo isn't installed. Heeeeeeeeelp!"

Had foo been installed from source, this problem wouldn't have existed
because the static libraries (if built), the pkgconfig files and the
header files are always installed alongside the dynamic libraries.


(*) - Slackware. Yes, I know that it's package-based when you install,
but at least you are able to remove many packages and/or replace them
with source versions. My own system probably contains very little of
the originally installed stuff now.

--
G. Stewart - godwin.stewart@example.com

If a deaf person has to go to court, is it still called a hearing?

Attachment: pgpXZcoh2zqf5.pgp
Description: PGP signature