DragonFly BSD
DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2003-10
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: variant symlinks (was Re: Anybody working on removing sendmail from base?)

From: ibotty <bsd@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2003 21:32:29 +0200

> Hmm, 47 different versions of the same *ONE* software is what we
> are limiting ourselves with at the moment.  But if you think
> about this in a recurring way, we could end up using a lot of
> disk space, wether we hide it or not.
> From what it looks, the whole idea does not space conservative,
> but heck, prove me wrong I say. 8-)

/me silently agrees ;)

> In a scenario where you need to install a package which has
> multiple dependancies, with sub-deps, it is going to result
> in a huge mess.  I am assuming that the sub-deps will have
> their own particular dependancy requirments thus giving us
> lots of packages.  Hiding them will not make any difference
> space wise.

this is where gentoo-portages SLOTS come into play.
our package manager should definitly support this (or a similar) scheme.

our vfs-layers, variant symlinks, etc.. should just be means to implement

fortunately, you will end up with less different versions, though ;)

> Unless this scheme is made optional, i.e. if the user chose
> it, I don't see potential in it.  But if the above issue is
> ironed out, then I don't see any problems, personally.  8-)

as i envision the package system, it will make no sense to switch it off.


[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]