On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 10:34:27AM -0600, Javier Vasquez wrote: > On 5/3/07, Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 22:38 -0600, Javier Vasquez wrote: > >> On 5/3/07, Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > ... > >> > > ... > >> > >> Nope, aptitude offers you the dependencies the distro developer > >> specifies (not just the application developer), some of them are > >> recommendations, some of them are strictly required. When you are to > >> compile the application yourself, you can find that even things > >> strictly required by a binary distro are really not. The reason is > >> that the distro developer compiled using a particular library for > >> example, when he/she could have used another or none. So on binary > >> distros one has 2 levels of non optional dependencies I believe, the > >> ones set by the original package developer, and the ones set by the > >> distro developer for the package. This is not true on sourceMage, not > >> sure on gentoo (it looks like people immediately thinks of gentoo when > >> talking about source based distros) since I don't know about it, and > >> it's just because the only really required dependencies on sourceMage > >> by policy are the ones set by the original package developer. > >> > >> Whether this makes a difference or not, it depends on the system one > >> wants to get. > > > >I specifically picked "gd" for that very reason. It supports eleventy > >options. The reason I picked it, is because the linked set of libraries > >for Debian pulls in some xlibs on even cursor based systems. > > > >Basically the changelog said something like: > > > > "the linking of the code against xlibs, only slightly increases > > the pull in of files amounting to 72KiB, these days this small > > amount of disk space does not matter. The performance is not > > affected in any way, but allows for 98% coverage and reduces > > package count by 12 flavors. If you must have no xlibs, compile > > it yourself without it." > > > >Which, to be honest, is the exact same reason people "restore or rebuild > >classic cars" or heavily customize the "ricers" they own, or build thier > >own house or hand craft the Linux Distro of their choice. > > > >> I might be wrong though about how debian package developers compile > >> things though, I'm not one, and it might be that there's a policy to > >> keep as required dependencies only the ones set by upstream, but I'm > >> not aware of it. > > > >There is the Debian Developers Guide and the Debian Free software Guide. > >These BOTH have an effect on the Original Source code. BTW, you do know > >that *EXCEPT* for non-free pieces (like non-source firmware and binary > >blobs) that Debian include *.orig.tar.gz for everything? They also have > >a *.diff.tar.gz... so following your comment about "keeping upstream > >untouched as much as possible" is not-genuine. Debian does this, but at > >the same time folowing the DFSG. > > > >> As a side note, something I liked from sourceMage was its policy of > >> keeping upstream code untouched as much as possible. I don't know of > >> any binary distro trying to keep up with that. However this is beyond > >> the discussion since there's a lot to talk about that, just something > >> to mention, :). > > > >I mentioned Debian Policy (Set forth by the Debian Free Software Guide) > >as being the BEST reason to run Debian Linux... or Debian FreeBSD or > >Debian period. > > > >> For anything else I agree. Just wanted to clarify a bit further about > >> the dependencies comment. For not compiling the kernel as a > >> suggestion, well, again it depends (I don't totally agree). For a > >> regular user with 40GB of HD or more, there's no problem on having a > >> blotted set of modules he/she will never use. If you have limited HD, > >> you'd like to compile only what you need, and not everything so far > >> supported by the kernel (besides you get more tunned configuration at > >> the same time for free if you want, I provided the pentium M example, > >> but I bet there are more, like the kind of pre-emption, the frequency, > >> etc, not that one gets better performance, but that one gets the right > >> tunned configuration for the system, and not just a blotted generic > >> one). Same thing applies to other packages. One might want to remove > >> any gnome/QT dependency as much as possible, one might not support > >> some graphics libraries although required for the general purpose, > >> etc. > > > >Good enough, I could pick, but won't. :-P > > > >> ... > > > >I am fully up on Gentoo. I like its handling, its tools for helping in > >dealing with packaging and other features... specifically not using > >upstart (at the moment) and other pieces that traditional UNIX systems > >have more in common with it. Gentoo is very friendly, it is just picky > >about its friends. > > > >> Please, if I'm completely wrong about my comments on dependencies, let > >> me know. Maybe there's a debian policiy talking about this (is there > >> a pointer?) that I'm not aware of, and I was just talking non sense, > >> :). > > > >The Debian Social Contract and the DFSG is located: > >http://www.debian.org/social_contract > > > >The Developer's Guide is located: > >http://www.debian.org/devel/ > > > >Specifically though if you want to really read on policy: > >http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ > > > >It ain;t short, but it will help you understand things like we have been > >discussing. > >-- > >greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You mentioned debian commitment to FSF and its social contract, as > very good reasons by themselves to run debian. I totally agree. > However debian is not the only distro with such commitment. Actually > sourceMage picked debian social contract and modified it a bit... snip...
I understand Greg's comments to be about Debian's commitment to enforcing a packaging policy, i.e. a policy on where and how things are installed. To me is quite a different thing than a social policy. In Debian, if the install scripts of a package to not put things where the policy says they should be _that_ is a bug in the package. It may also be considered a bug in some other distro.s. I've not kept track of this sort of policy issue in any other distro. since I discovered Debian. The Social Policy is also good. But I think it is easy to feel good about a Social Policy, and it is hard work to implement a packaging policy. -- Paul E Condon [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
