Sean Doran wrote:
> | Plus there's the annoyance of having lots
> | of stuff installed that pkgsrc may/will end up replicating.
> 
> Whatever happened to openpackages?

feh. as soon as I saw it was based on RPM, I ran away.

> | I suggest anyone who is considering a newer Mac take a look at OS
> | X and fink before they knock it.
> 
> Fink is missing packages, has a lousy conflict and dependency
> management system (and dselect, ugh), and has nowhere nearly
> as nice a way of looking at what patches are going to be applied
> to what version of a given piece of software.

This has never affected me: I have never had a conflict. I have 
just 83 packages installed, though. I have never had to use 
dselect or apt-get: I know they're there, but they've been well 
abstracted away from me.

> Do you do fink "-current"?

Yeah, I pull from CVS every day (or when I remember).

> | fink is an enhancement to OS X
> | where NetBSD is a replacement for it
> 
> NetBSD > pkgsrc.  The latter would be handy, for choice.
> 
> | and it's not like you can't compile from source if what you need
> | isn't available through fink.
> 
> Sure,  you can keep your own /usr/local/... just like in the 
> old days before pkgsrc/ports/fink/etc. -- nothing stops you.
> I think these systems make updating packages + dependencies
> alot easier, and pkgsrc does have the advantage of allowing
> one to share trees among computers with different architectures...

Seems like you have found more to dislike about fink than I have.



-- 
Paul Beard
8040 27th Ave NE
Seattle WA 98115
206 529 8400

If this is timesharing, give me my share right now.