Subject: Re: syspkg dependencies
To: None <>
From: Alistair Crooks <>
List: current-users
Date: 10/19/2004 15:59:56
On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 11:50:43PM -0500, David Young wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 09:44:47PM -0500, Peter Seebach wrote:
> > A bit of poking around suggests that syspkg doesn't do much, if any,
> > dependency checking right now.
> > 
> > Is this intentional?  Is work being done on this, or is it mostly a dead
> > chunk of code?
> It's not dead, it's just sleeping.  I don't think it makes much sense
> to take steps with syspkg until some anticipated "new & improved" pkg
> utilities become available.  The existing pkg-utilities codebase is a
> dead end.

Well, any new pkg_install utilities will have the same UI as the
existing utilities, so I don't think that's an impediment.  Not to say
that they're the best coding that I've ever seen (in fact, I'd put
them towards the other end of the scale, which is one reason I won't
let my name be associated with them).

What's wrong with using the existing pkg_install utilities for system
packages?  (A genuine question, I know that David has a lot more
experience in this area than I do).