Re: Simplifying package installation.

[Derek Simkowiak <dereks kd-dev com>]

> > 	This rocks.  Great idea!  If none of the recognized package
> > systems is installed, the installer can default it to a .tar.gz and
> > install it wherever the user wants (and has permission to).
> 
> Is that libc5, libc6, gnome in /opt, do they have the other bits you
> need ?
> 
> tar.gz doesnt even have signatures. 
[...]
> I think you've missed 40 or 50 major ones before that. Like authentication,
> dependancies, platform, OS, ..

	I agree: falling back to .tar.gz means there is no package
management at all.

	The goal was to use the "native" package management system for the
O.S. that the application was being installed on.  So if I'm on a Redhat
system, I can uninstall gnumeric with a command like "rpm -ev gnumeric",
and Gnome applications would show up in my app database along with all the
other non-Gnome apps.

	But if the O.S. does not have a package management
system/database, should Gnome be required to provide one for it?  That is,
if the system does not provide a package management system that has
authentication, dependencies, etc. should Gnome be required to have a
package manage system of its own to fall back on?  Something other than
.tar.gz?

	More to the point: should the package management system be part
of Gnome or part of the O.S.?

	Since people will install applications other than just Gnome
applications, I would say the package management should be part of the
O.S., not part of Gnome.

	If some crappy-ass Unix variant doesn't have a package database
that provides all the features of an RPM or DEB system, and the "Gnome
Installer" falls back to .tar.gz as a last resort, then that is the fault
of the O.S., not the fault of Gnome.  I still think .tar.gz is a good
fallback.


--Derek Simkowiak
  dereks@kd-dev.com