Re: The ports-system and userland in general.

[Weapon of Mass Deduction <blacklist@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Michael Neumann wrote:
> Magnus Eriksson wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Weapon of Mass Deduction wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I'm currently thinking out a good userland
> > > architecture, so I would like to know what
> > > qualities he or others is/are especially looking
> > > for then.
> >
> >
> >
> > Seems I missed some of the discussion.  Anyway, here's my thoughts.
> > Mostly semi-random, but I've thought of some things before and this seems
> > like a good time to get them off my chest.  :-)
> >
> >   My main experience is with pkgsrc, by the way.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   Please think of a system that does not depend on magic Makefiles.  Make
> > a specification that anyone can implement, be it with 'make install' like
> > command-line tools, graphical package selection or whatever.  Just leave
> > room for smart implementations you haven't thought of yet.
>
>
> What do you mean with "anyone can implement"? That's some sort of 
> non-executable text-file, a specification in XML or YAML?
>
> I know of some Ruby-related package managers, which build a 
> specification (from Ruby source), and this specification (it's in YAML) 
> is then distributed and can be installed on other machines. So it 
> contains the instructions on how to build and install (or install-only 
> in the binary case) the package. For those who are interested and may 
> get some input:
>
>   http://rpa-base.rubyforge.org/
>   http://rubygems.rubyforge.org/
>
> Regards,
>
>   Michael


YAML... :X
vs.
XML (2.0)... :)

XML 2.0 is going to be really superb, but it isn't out yet due
to the usual quibbling.

But technical implementation issues like in what format the (meta)data
will be stored is for later, I would say.

--
Greetings,
WMD (tfa . x @ inter . nl . net)