The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: PKG PacKaGer update 2.2.11-7 release

I haven't studied this.

It embodies a distinction between "distribution independent packages"
and "distribution specific packages".  That's a good thing.  Of course,
the authors may use .pkg for their distribution, -and- be pushing that
as the generic extension.  I don't know.

Since it's based on RPM, it about has to allow adding a package from a
URL.  That's a great thing for security advisories.  I saw someone bash
this on this list - and I think it's pure Ludism.

It'll install the most common package format in the "generic linux
world".  People tend to provide .tar.gz and .rpm, if you look around the
net a little.  Debian's good organization has been a downside on this:
all the .deb's are found in debian archives, instead of scattered
around, the way .rpm's are.  So to a non-debian person, it looks like
EVERYTHING is .rpm, and NOTHING is .deb. Anyway, it lets debian users
install more stuff.  That's good.

It's not controlled by RH. GPL'd stuff can split, and it looks like it
just did.

Shaya Potter wrote:
> 
> What's improved? besides the fact that we can change to whatever extension
> we want.
> 
> Shaya
> 
> On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> 
> > That package manager is an improved RPM manager.
> >
> > dpkg is a constant source of frustration for me. Dpkg is again in a state
> > where no one fixes important bugs. What is the ETA of deity?
> >
> > This package manager would also allow better compatibility to
> > software floating around which was packaged using rpm. Maybe it could be
> > improved for debian?
> >
> > On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Shaya Potter wrote:
> >
> > >On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> > >
> > >> We should probably use this.  Flame at will.
> > >>
> > >> http://www.metrotron.com/pub/packages/pkg
> > >>
> > >
> > >I think this comes down to the same thing. RPM is not as powerful as dpkg,
> > >therefore, if we are going to make packages that arn't going to be used
> > >for anybody else anyways besides Debian based distributions, what's the
> > >purpose in using something based on RPM.
> >
> > --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ ---
> >


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .