[arch-general] Package coordination with archlinuxfr repo?

[David C. Rankin]

On 01/12/2011 10:51 PM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> I want new thoughts about what the meaning of a package is ... and how
> it can be better represented for derivation from it's integrals;
> source code and user state.  the tarball has served us well for a long
> time, but ... in the now-time of cheap encryption, distributed clouds,
> parallel peers and ...
> 

So you want to talk calculus do you? Perhaps the method of strained time and
strained coordinates would would give a better approximation? Poincare-Linstedt
maybe?

Seriously, I've been very impressed with Arch packaging compared to rpm or deb.
KISS has served Arch well. The only thoughts I've had on the issue were with the
gzipped package directory format of the repository indexes, but I don't see
anything wrong with it. It works as well as it would in a flat file format or in
some record oriented db format. I'm sure there is a faster way to do it, but I
haven't noticed any slowness with the current system.

A package in any distro provides the necessary installables along with a way to
check for conflicts and resolve dependencies. The current packages do that well.
The only differences that I've seen with pacman vs. some of the others were in
areas of handling or anticipating previously installed config or font files that
cause rare install failures. But, I think the KISS vs. 'try to anticipate
everything' argument ways in favor of not radically changing how pacman handles
these issues -- unless there is just a wealth of unused resources laying around
to experiment with.

Great question. I'd also be interested in what other ideas there are about
positive and realistic improvement can be made to the current system.

-- 
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Rankin Law Firm, PLLC
510 Ochiltree Street
Nacogdoches, Texas 75961
Telephone: (936) 715-9333
Facsimile: (936) 715-9339
www.rankinlawfirm.com