Re: Comments on deb-support-without-dpkg.patch

[Pavel Tsekov <ptsekov gmx net>]

On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Arpi wrote:

> > This patch although useful has certain drawbacks and I don't think it is
> > ready to replace the use of dpkg as-is.
>
> i never thought so.
>
> > 1) To use the patch one has to install development tools (i.e. binutils).
> > This is not a major problem but it is still annoying - especially for
> > non-developers.
> >
> > 2) "Open=%cd %p#uar" differs in behaviour from "Open=%cd %p#deb" - in my
> > opinion "Open=%cd %p#deb" is better. However, the "deb" script may be
> > modified to use "ar" when it detects that "dpgk" is missing. I think this
> > would be the best thing to do.
> >
> > 3) The View command is highly unportable.
> >
> > Are you willing to improve your patch ?
> >
>
> no, at least not in the near future. it works for me as-is, and i have
> no time and resources for testing and improving it for other systems.
> anyway of course it should only be used when dpkg is not available.
> in that case, it's still far more better than nothing...
> about the differences to dpkg - i've never seen the #deb thing working,
> as i dont have debian (or other dpkg-based distros) installed.

dpkg is freely available for download. I never used it myself but I found
it and tested the deb script as well as your patch. As you said above
your patch is supposed to kick in if dpkg is not available... The way you
implemented it uar is used all the time even if dpkg is present.

I might try to implement 2 myself when I have more time - it doesn't seem
to be too hard anyway.

IMO, this patch is not ready for inclusion in MC. Still I don't think your
work is in vain - I never knew that .deb files are just ordinary archives
and it is possible to manipulate them trough ar. Based on this knowledge I
will try to provide a better .deb handler .