9front - general discussion about 9front
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jacob Todd <jaketodd422@gmail.com>
To: 9front@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: package manager? seriously?
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 13:22:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=HNsGM+bP+cTA5-hBzap0tH3LUmw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d02dae2b-b81b-4103-af9f-2092cdd0d3ef@r6g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3127 bytes --]

What stuff are you talking about? Ape ports? A package manager? It's unclear
from your post.
 On Apr 8, 2011 9:16 AM, "cinap_lenrek" <cinap_lenrek@gmx.de> wrote:
> i completly agree with this!
>
> i'm not a fan of package managers... compiling and installing native
> stuff in plan9 is very easy... you untar a file somewhere, run mk
> install
> and its done... after this procedure, you know exactly what files
> where
> installed/changed and the process is transparent and not hidden in
> replica logs and shell scripts...
>
> but the image changes when you consider ape ports... these *have*
> dependencies and unfortunatly are not self contained :-(
>
> maybe we just add the stuff in the 9front distribution then?
>
> --
> cinap
>
> On Apr 4, 3:16 am, Ethan Grammatikidis <eeke...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> Ugh. I'm tired, I've been writing and doing stuff far too much this
>> past week, and then people start bringing up "what's going to be
>> 9front's package manager" as if it were some kind of fait accompli,
>> and instantly talking about "how are we going to have the package
>> manager deal with config files?"
>>
>> I think martian67 helped me organize my thoughts best when he said
>> "packages enforce a certain structure on things." ... I don't if this
>> will come across in text but what I really wanted to reply to that is
>> "Oh! OH!! Ohhh yeeesss, let's ENFORCE STRUCTURE!!! STRUCTURE is
>> GOOOOOOOD! Must have STRUCTURE!"
>>
>> Plan 9's design is extremely good at making structure work in good,
>> useful, non-limiting ways. What's the system which makes the most use
>> of package management today? Gnu/Linux. What's the one system which
>> employs structure in the very worst way possible throughout? Gnu/Linux.
>>
>> Package managers are a big part of the disease. Dependency tracking
>> helps create the longest and most brittle dependency chains. Config
>> file management isn't management at all. Either you are managing the
>> config files on your system or something else is, which way is it
>> going to go?
>>
>> Another big argument is package managers somehow stop things making a
>> mess all over your system. Er, no, they provide a way for people to
>> patch random shit to fit an arbitrary structure... Is "random shit"
>> even remotely relevant in the context of 9front? For fuck's sake how
>> much bullshit are we going to pile on this OS anyway? Without, you
>> know, making it fit the OS first? Good grief people, THINK already.
>>
>> Finally... "ohmigosh but the ONLY way you can possibly uninstall
>> cleanly is with a package manager" argument, to which I will reply
>> with two words: make uninstall. Plan 9 mkfiles  already have all the
>> files they install listed, it shouldn't be hard to put an uninstall
>> target in the files every mkfile sources. This isn't random bullshit
>> made to work with crappy implementations of make, this is something
>> for which we can make an uninstall target work already.
>>
>> For those STILL in fucking lust with package managers, will you
>> PLEASE stop thinking of 9front as a suitable platform for megalithic
>> dinosaurian monstrosities?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4021 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2011-04-08 13:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-04-04  1:16 Ethan Grammatikidis
2011-04-04  5:24 ` Taru Karttunen
2011-04-04  6:04   ` Stanley Lieber
2011-04-04 11:37     ` Jacob Todd
2011-04-08 13:16 ` cinap_lenrek
2011-04-08 13:22   ` Jacob Todd [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='BANLkTi=HNsGM+bP+cTA5-hBzap0tH3LUmw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=jaketodd422@gmail.com \
    --cc=9front@googlegroups.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).