On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 11:19 PM, clemens fischer<ino-news@spotteswoode.dnsalias.org> wrote:
The advantage is easy to see: you can always see what package some file belongs to,
pacman -Qo /path/to/file
and removing a package is as simple as removing matching links and the installation directory.
pacman -R pkgname
All files belonging to a package are in one place.
Well not quite the same, but pacman -Ql pkgname can be used to similar effect
Would going this route for arch-linux packages be seen as an improvement?
Let me get this straight, you propose to use one tool for package management (spill) together with another tool for package management (pacman)? Why? Admittedly symlinking ala spill is a nice and very KISS way of keeping track of files in your system, but since Arch already has a tool to do this, which keeps track of dependencies as well, why use a second one? Henning