On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:18:21 +0100 "Yury V. Zaytsev" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Vis. "waste days on recompiling packages from older source archives" > > -- no, I just find the homepage, download the source tarball, and > > compile it according to my preferences. I do not have a hard time > > determining and accounting for prereqs. > > I guess you have never compiled anything requiring more than 3 libraries > then. Try a static build of VLC (or, say, qtiplot, anyone?) for starters > and than report back. No, I've done the "linux from scratch" thing, actually, which means building a new glibc, bootstrap-rebuilding gcc, etc, then every other single library after that. Not that I do that often (or want to), but it's been done and I honestly almost prefer building from source; on my current install X is from the distro but the entire gtk chain is source built, partially because I have a public project involving gtk so it's curiousity. I rebuild the kernel all the time, my system is always totally stable, I have no problem "forcing" in higher level packages on top of that. So yeah, I kind of sneer at a lot of the install systems that have developed in the past decade (those years I spent travelling must have been big ones in linux development!) altho this sneer is completely ridiculous and unjustified. I am coming to appreciate the ease and dynamism of it all. Certainly, mc belongs near the center of the linux universe. But I'm still sure that 2 DVD fedora set was designed by them to fit their graphical install system, which is a little crass but I imagine does a fine job of quickly and easily installing some generic style systems (just mc was not on any of them ;P). RHEL I would point out is more specifically a commercial server product and I would hope any server I have to connect to has mc available, so good for them. -- MK <[email protected]> C/perl & web programmer _______________________________________________ Mc mailing list http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc
