Hi all
I've read the debian news announcement today
(http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090730). What got me very
interested was the part about a new package format (in my oppinion
this area can be vastly improved, and I'm interested in contributing).
Searching the list archives I was unable to find
2009/7/31 Giacomo A. Catenazzi :
> Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
>>
>> Hi all
>> I've read the debian news announcement today
>> (http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090730). What got me very
>> interested was the part about a new package format
>
> There a
2009/7/31 Giacomo A. Catenazzi :
> Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
>>
>> 2009/7/31 Giacomo A. Catenazzi :
>>>
>>> Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
>>>>
>>>> (in my oppinion
>>>> this area can be vastly improved, and I'm interested in con
Is there any way to actually make it harder to spam the list? I just
subscribed and already see spam and phishing attacks...
2009/8/1 Unex Webmaster :
> Unex Webmail Technical Services-
>
> Account Subscriber,
>
> We are currently performing maintenance on our Digital webmail Server
2009/8/1 Tollef Fog Heen :
> ]] Eugene Gorodinsky
>
> | I also think some abstraction from the actual filesystem is a good
> | idea. For example currently the only way to install a lib in a
> | directory other than the one it was intended for is by using a hack
> | that would loo
2009/8/1 brian m. carlson :
> On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 02:24:28AM +0300, Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
>> Is there any way to actually make it harder to spam the list? I just
>> subscribed and already see spam and phishing attacks...
>
> Yes. There are infinitely many ways to make
A while ago I participated in a discussion here about the debian
package format. Quite recently I tried to spark up a discussion about
package formats on the LSB list but did not get any replies, hopefully
this discussion will be more welcome here. Constructive crticism is
welcome, so feel free to
I believe RPM is not suited well enough for this job, it tries to do
everything rather than doing one thing and doing it well. The package
format I'm proposing has a few features rpm does not.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trou
>Not to mention that the package format is not the only thing that matters.
>It is the contents of the package, the rules, specs and standards that are
>followed that cause the most differences.
I aggree, and I'm hoping to resolve this issue
>Oh and I guess I'm missing something, otherwise why wo
> I've read that several times, but I still must be missing something.
>My impression is that your poins is essentially the following: 1. it's
>too much work for "small distros" to use any new format instead of one
>of the big established ones; 2. let's reduce the number of big
>established format
Sorry for the delay, I've been very busy last week.
>> A while ago I participated in a discussion here about the debian
>> package format. Quite recently I tried to spark up a discussion about
>> package formats on the LSB list but did not get any replies
>
>Can you point to the message (preferabl
11 matches
Mail list logo
