[pacman-dev] Libalpm direction and usage by others

Xavier shiningxc at gmail.com
Thu Mar 27 18:11:19 EDT 2008

Miklos Vajna wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:33:18PM -0500, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 3. Scrap the whole libalpm/split idea. Whoa! I know you are thinking
>> "but that would be a step backwards!". Would it? I can tell you this-
>> the pacman 2.9.8 codebase was about half the size of the current
>> monster, and we have a lot of crazy design issues going on. Instead of
>> trying to write a pacman library, why not just implement a friendly
>> frontend, command-line interface, which is a bit more Unix-y? For
>> example, monotone has its "automate" command (I haven't looked at this
>> in some time, so let me know if I am wrong) that is designed to be
>> used by other clients as machine-parseable. git is based around this
>> concept as well- look at all the low level tools like rev-parse, etc.
> there are other good examples, like git, darcs or mplayer's slave mode,
> where the interface is script-friendly, so (almost) nobody claims for a
> library.

Well, maybe if pacman was really designed with this in mind, I would 
find it less ugly indeed.

>> 4. Switch to something like python. I'm resistant to this idea.
>> Although I think scripting languages like this have great benefits, I
>> don't think pacman needs most of them. Having a package manager that
>> always works is important to me, and part of me just thinks a
>> low-level compiled language is the right thing for a system tool.
> exactly. you probably heard of the poor gentoo guys who broke their
> python, losing their package manager as well :P

That's true, but hmm.. Even though I don't know python well, it seems 
many programmers like it and are efficient with it, so it would probably 
be more practical from that point of view.

More information about the pacman-dev mailing list