FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux User Repository

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-06-2008, 08:45 AM
Allan McRae
 
Default Should I bring rpm/dkpg to community

Hi TU's,

I was wondering what peoples opinions are about putting rpm/dpkg in
[community]. They both have a descent number of votes (27 & 33) so
people obviously find them useful. Does anyone have objections about
their "unArchness" (it is a real word, honest!)? It is what has stopped
me moving dpkg so far...


Allan
 
Old 04-06-2008, 08:58 AM
JJDaNiMoTh
 
Default Should I bring rpm/dkpg to community

On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 18:45:07 +1000
Allan McRae <mcrae_allan@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi TU's,
>
> I was wondering what peoples opinions are about putting rpm/dpkg in
> [community]. They both have a descent number of votes (27 & 33) so
> people obviously find them useful. Does anyone have objections about
> their "unArchness" (it is a real word, honest!)? It is what has stopped
> me moving dpkg so far...
>
> Allan

Arch Users don't need them. IMO these votes are from noob people that
want to install rpm ( bleah ) or deb pkg in their archlinux box, when
the right thing is searching trought aur or make PKGBUILD.

But is your choice

--
JJDaNiMoTh - ArchLinux Trusted User
 
Old 04-06-2008, 09:01 AM
RedShift
 
Default Should I bring rpm/dkpg to community

Allan McRae wrote:

Hi TU's,

I was wondering what peoples opinions are about putting rpm/dpkg in
[community]. They both have a descent number of votes (27 & 33) so
people obviously find them useful. Does anyone have objections about
their "unArchness" (it is a real word, honest!)? It is what has stopped
me moving dpkg so far...


Allan




As far as I am concerned, rpm, dpkg, etc... are just pieces of software. I see no reason why they shouldn't be included in community. It would even be an advantage, you could install distributions that use dpkg or rpm from Arch Linux.

Glenn
 
Old 04-06-2008, 09:05 AM
BaSh
 
Default Should I bring rpm/dkpg to community

2008/4/6, JJDaNiMoTh <jjdanimoth@gmail.com>:
> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 18:45:07 +1000
> Arch Users don't need them. IMO these votes are from noob people that
> want to install rpm ( bleah ) or deb pkg in their archlinux box, when
> the right thing is searching trought aur or make PKGBUILD.
>
> But is your choice
Exactly, i don't think they are necessary.

--
Andrea `BaSh` Scarpino
Arch Linux Trusted User
Linux User: #430842
 
Old 04-06-2008, 09:11 AM
"Roman Kyrylych"
 
Default Should I bring rpm/dkpg to community

2008/4/6, RedShift <redshift@pandora.be>:
> Allan McRae wrote:
>
> > Hi TU's,
> >
> > I was wondering what peoples opinions are about putting rpm/dpkg in
> [community]. They both have a descent number of votes (27 & 33) so people
> obviously find them useful. Does anyone have objections about their
> "unArchness" (it is a real word, honest!)? It is what has stopped me moving
> dpkg so far...
>
> As far as I am concerned, rpm, dpkg, etc... are just pieces of software. I
> see no reason why they shouldn't be included in community. It would even be
> an advantage, you could install distributions that use dpkg or rpm from Arch
> Linux.
>

I think they shouldn't be in community for reasons similar to why
qpkg/aurbuild/yaourt are not in community.

--
Roman Kyrylych (*оман Кирилич)
 
Old 04-06-2008, 09:40 AM
"Ray Rashif"
 
Default Should I bring rpm/dkpg to community

IMHO that isn't enough of a warrant for it to be in [community]. If we want to take into consideration such a reasoning, then akin to what danimoth mentioned, we should see a few other tools in the repo too. Furthermore, 27 and 33*only barely pass as "popular".


Well in any case, if a TU wants, he gets.

On 06/04/2008, RedShift <redshift@pandora.be> wrote:
Allan McRae wrote:
Hi TU's,


I was wondering what peoples opinions are about putting rpm/dpkg in [community]. *They both have a descent number of votes (27 & 33) so people obviously find them useful. *Does anyone have objections about their "unArchness" (it is a real word, honest!)? *It is what has stopped me moving dpkg so far...


Allan



As far as I am concerned, rpm, dpkg, etc... are just pieces of software. I see no reason why they shouldn't be included in community. It would even be an advantage, you could install distributions that use dpkg or rpm from Arch Linux.


Glenn
 
Old 04-06-2008, 10:55 AM
Allan McRae
 
Default Should I bring rpm/dkpg to community

Allan McRae wrote:


I was wondering what peoples opinions are about putting rpm/dpkg in
[community]. They both have a descent number of votes (27 & 33) so
people obviously find them useful. Does anyone have objections about
their "unArchness" (it is a real word, honest!)? It is what has
stopped me moving dpkg so far...




Well, I seem to have a fairly negative reaction on average so far...

I just want to point out that if a user wants to install a rpm/deb
package, all the tools are in extra/community already. These packages
would make it slightly easier to install them but also give the ability
to create these package formats which is why I grabbed dpkg in the first
place.


Allan
 
Old 04-06-2008, 11:12 AM
Neil Darlow
 
Default Should I bring rpm/dkpg to community

Hi,

Allan McRae wrote:

Well, I seem to have a fairly negative reaction on average so far...


Perhaps pragmatic would be a better assessment.

I just want to point out that if a user wants to install a rpm/deb
package, all the tools are in extra/community already.


But while they're not in Community, they are labelled Unsupported. I'm
just thinking of the potential for breakage that can occur when people
start mixing packages from foreign distributions with those of Arch and
start complaining when it doesn't work.


You can always use the "Not Supported" card but if they're in Community
then there is the suggestion that these mechanisms are supported.


Regards,
Neil Darlow
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:16 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org