Re: Gnome Package Manager?

[Tiago Cogumbreiro <cogumbreiro gmail com>]

What about autopackage.org?

On 11/9/05, Foster, Gareth <gareth foster siemens com> wrote:
>
> I thought I'd share this here, it was sparked by a recent gtkmm list post,
> about how to install gtkmm on fedora.
>
> > >     I'm running Fedora Core 4 which isn't fully updated
> > unfortunately since it isn't connected to the Internet, nor
> > can be for a while.
> >
> >
> > That's a shame, because by far the best way to do this is:
> >
> > % yum list | grep mm
> >
> > Pick all the devel packages out of there (you might be able
> > to do another grep, | grep devel) and copy and paste them
> > into a command ...
> >
> > % yum install (packagelist)
> >
> > Next best bet is to pull the packages from fedora extras and
> > burn them to a CD, then on the internetless fedora box, do ...
> >
> > % rpm -ivh /media/cdrecorder/*.rpm
> >
> > Or similar.
> >
> > If that fails or isnt an option, then you may need to
> > ./configure with prefix equals /usr rather than /usr/local, i
> > always get bitten by that on fedora.
> >
>
> I then went on to waffle about this idea I've had floating around in my head
> for ages.
>
> > I always thought what would be great, seeing as every distro
> > that matters uses some sort of package management interface,
> > would be a libpackagemanger, a nice cpp interface to software
> > management for linux. This would be some sort of
> > freedesktop.org thing, which had specialisations for each
> > package tool or distro.
> >
> > class c_package_manager
> > {
> >   install_package();
> >   remove_package();
> > };
> >
> > Then, it would be "just" a matter of knocking up a Gnome
> > Package manager and KDE package manager which ran on top of
> > this wonderful api. The next step would be metapackages,
> > gtkmm being the case in point, which gtkmm.org could link to,
> > just like a windows installer, the thing would just be an xml
> > file, which our new gnome package manager can read, to
> > install all the packages needed for this group.
> >
> > <xml>
> >  <package>
> >   <name>gtkmm</name>
> >   <req>gtkmm</req>
> >   <req>gtkmm-devel</req>
> >   <req>libsigc++</req>
> >   <req>glibmm</req>
> >   <req>et cetera</req>
> >   <source>
> >    <fedora>
> >     <url>http:://url-for-fedora-extras</url>
> >    </fedora>
> >    <tarball>
> >     <url>http:://url-for-fallback-to-source-code</url>
> >   </source>
> >  </package>
> > <xml>
> >
>
> I suppose doing this through freedesktop.org would allow you to have a focal
> point, to stop situations like two people deciding that a gtkmm metapackage
> contains two different sets of packages (one that includes the gnomemm stuff
> and one that doesn't for example).
>
> Ayway, before I start waffling about this again, I'll stop. Feedback
> welcome.
>
> Gaz
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-devel-list mailing list
> gnome-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-devel-list
>


--
Tiago Cogumbreiro <cogumbreiro users sf net>

http://s1x.homelinux.net/