Re: Is it time to abandon Dpkg?

[Brian Mays <bem5r@virginia.edu>]

Chris Fearnley <cjf@netaxs.com> writes:

> I think I have publically posted rpm's shortcomings many times.
> Briefly,
>
> [ stuff deleted ]
>
>  - ancient version of /bin/mt so I had to copy my Debian binary

Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> writes:

> All this points out that in many ways, Debian is incompatible with
> RedHat - you can't overlay one on top of the other without a lot of
> work.  Switching from .deb to .rpm will hide that important fact, and
> end up with debian vanishing ("It's broken.  Debian .rpms don't work
> with my RedHat system.  Don't use Debian!"), and all the better
> features and better thought out ways of doing things (the open
> development model & 120 developers vigorously debating issues produces
> better results than half a dozen - Debian is to Linux distributions
> what Linux is to Unix) will vanish with it.

I completely agree with this.  I, for one, don't want people confusing
my (i.e., Debian's) version of GNU cpio and mt with RedHat's.  I've
worked very hard fixing bugs in these two utilities and adding SCSI
support to mt (all the while, diligently forwarding my improvements to
the GNU people just in case they ever decide to release a new version
of cpio).  It's all to easy to see that users will likely mix and
match packages from Debian and RedHat, and I'll end up getting e-mail
reporting bugs in cpio that I fixed a year ago.

> On Sun, 22 Dec 1996, Ian Jackson wrote:
> 
> > Incidentally, providing a program to install .rpm's is a
> > two-edged sword: people may choose our distribution because of
> > it, but they may choose to release their packages only as
> > .rpm's as a result.
> 
> Maybe.
> 
> On the other hand, .rpm doesn't have any equivalent to debmake (which
> is, IMO, one of the most important developments for Debian since dpkg
> itself!).  It makes creating .deb packages much easier than it used to
> be and still much easier than making .rpm packages.

If we are disappointed that those in the greater Linux community,
especially commercial developers, tend to provide .rpm files and not
.deb files, perhaps we should take a tip from Red Hat and PROMOTE OUR
PACKAGING SYSTEM!  Red Hat's web site contains a full description of
their RPM system, along with the how developers should use it and
especially why developers should use it.  Unfortunately, while
promoting our distribution, we have not given enough attention to
explaining our packaging system to other non-Debian Linux users and
developers and to explaining what advantages it provides.  Heck,
third-party developers might even prefer it over RPM, if only they
knew what is was and how to use it.

With this in mind and assuming we don't abandon dpkg, of course, we
should focus some of our efforts in making it as easy as possible to
build .deb files on non-Debian systems.  In this endeavor, Christoph
Lameter's debmake utilities should go a long way.  What's needed is
more documentation explaining the system, and step-by-step
instructions for making third-party packages.  Ideally it would be
nice to have a few of our developers volunteer to work with
third-party developers: answering questions, reviewing their packages,
offering suggestions to improve third-party packages, and ensuring
that these packages conform more or less to Debian's standards.

-- 
Brian


--
Please respect the confidentiality of material on the debian-private list.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com