I've recently been looking at the code and I may be intruding here, but here's my opinion nevertheless. If you feel the need to correct me or comment, go right ahead. On 1/8/06, VMiklos <vmiklos@frugalware.org> wrote:
hi
is there any reason why the download code is in pacman and not in the library? yes, i know, this way the frontends are not forced to use libftp, for example they can use curl, if you want. but i think this is not the same situation as the list handling functions / GList (ie. at a gtk frontend)
imho placing the old download code in pacman, and not in the library is a disadvantage, and not an advantage
The way I see it it is always an advantage, it's simpler this way. It's entirely up to the frontends to download the packages and the db's. One can implement a more exotic method of download, for instance, the frontend could retrieve the packages with the help of a bittorrent library. That would alleviate the burden on the main or the mirror's server. Or one could check the packages for viruses, but I'm really just dreaming here...
or we could allow to use NULL as the download cb function pointer, and then use the our own download code
This, in my opinion, would be better, by letting the frontend choose.
opinions? if i would implement this then theoratically you wouldn't have objections?
udv / greetings, VMiklos
Hope you don't mind the intrusion, Joao -- A mind all logic is like a knife all blade. It makes the hand bleed that uses it. -- Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941)