Re: [Nautilus-list] Idea for Nautilus and GMC.

[Pavel Machek <pavel ucw cz>]

Hi!

> > We are not talking about bootsrap here. Miguel wants to modify
> > nautilus, so this is case when you have already Nautilus
> > installed. 
>
> I thought your beef was with installers, not setting the execute bit
> with Nautilus?

Okay. Miguel said that he wants to modify nautilus to make binary
installers easier. I do not like that.

Binary installers in bootstrap cases are probably neccessary evil, but
I would hate to see binary installers more than absolutely neccessary.

> > Installed nautilus means that you probably have gnorpm already, right?
>
> I wouldn't bet on it. Ximian GNOME doesn't include gnorpm, and it's
> never been considered a core part of GNOME so there's a fair chance that
> it isn't installed.

If nautilus at least has right click on rpm doing rpm -i <package>, it
should be fine. gnorpm is not strictly needed.

> > No?
> >
> > .rpm is ugly header + cpio archive.
> >
> > .deb is ar archive + tar archive.
> >
> > Looks pretty close to tarball to me.
>
> Just because you *can* doesn't mean you *should*. There are extraneous
> circumstances when this is necessary, like when people break their RPM
> setup, but doing this defeats the purpose of having packages in the
> first place... you might as well use slackware.

No, because I still can rpm -i.

What should be default action on rpm is interesting question... I'd
guess that opening it as tar is obviously safe. Installing it may
bring some "interesting" security problems.
                                                                Pavel
-- 
The best software in life is free (not shareware)!              Pavel
GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+