On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 07:06:34PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 07:55:31AM +0000, Gerrit Pape wrote: > > > Is this really a good idea? > > > > Yes, why not? It solves the OP's problem; it lets you install packages > > that provide a service without enabling the service automatically; it > > uses the dpkg dependency facility to show or solve conflicts; it adds > > flexibility, and avoids unnecessary conflicts. > > > > You might say it blows up the Packages file. Well, yes, but I don't > > think the scalability problem with the number of packages included in > > Debian should stop us developing good design choices, or adding new good > > quality packages to Debian. I'm confident the problem will be solved > > technically some day. > > It's solved now - edit configuration files! It's not essential that > everything can be configured by adding/removing packages.
It's not essential to have everything configured through configuration files. I haven't heard any reason yet why splitting the packages would be a bad thing. And there's more advantages: it eases usage of different service managers than sysvinit and init scripts, support of a different init scheme can be done through an alternative package which 'provides' the default *-run package; same for services running under a superserver, and corresponding alternatives; it plays well with fully automated installs; it separates services from programs. Regards, Gerrit. -- Open projects at http://smarden.org/pape/. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
