* apt based package dist for guile? @ 2003-08-01 11:32 Nic 2003-08-03 23:41 ` MJ Ray 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nic @ 2003-08-01 11:32 UTC (permalink / raw) Has anyone ever considered setting up an apt package system for guile? I think the FSF would probably be happy to host it on savannah if we asked them nicely. Such a system would be similar to CPAN. But much simpler. Any thoughts? -- Nic Ferrier http://www.tapsellferrier.co.uk _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-01 11:32 apt based package dist for guile? Nic @ 2003-08-03 23:41 ` MJ Ray 2003-08-04 8:44 ` Nic 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: MJ Ray @ 2003-08-03 23:41 UTC (permalink / raw) Nic <nferrier@tapsellferrier.co.uk> wrote: > Has anyone ever considered setting up an apt package system for guile? Do you mean something other than http://packages.debian.org/guile* then? _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-03 23:41 ` MJ Ray @ 2003-08-04 8:44 ` Nic 2003-08-04 16:31 ` Thamer Al-Harbash 2003-08-05 22:16 ` MJ Ray 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Nic @ 2003-08-04 8:44 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: guile-user MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk> writes: > Nic <nferrier@tapsellferrier.co.uk> wrote: > > Has anyone ever considered setting up an apt package system for guile? > > Do you mean something other than http://packages.debian.org/guile* then? Yes I do. I mean something exclusively for guile packages and probably something outside of the Debian project. Doing the search you suggested lists versions of guile as well as packages. There isn't a specific debian category for guile packages. I just think it would be a cool way of achieving the same things CPAN does. -- Nic Ferrier http://www.tapsellferrier.co.uk _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-04 8:44 ` Nic @ 2003-08-04 16:31 ` Thamer Al-Harbash 2003-08-05 13:45 ` Joshua Judson Rosen 2003-08-05 22:16 ` MJ Ray 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Thamer Al-Harbash @ 2003-08-04 16:31 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Nic wrote: > I just think it would be a cool way of achieving the same things CPAN > does. I'd sooner stick a needle in my eye than use a CPAN like system. -- Thamer Al-Harbash GPG Key fingerprint: D7F3 1E3B F329 8DD5 FAE3 03B1 A663 E359 D686 AA1F "to understand recursion first one must understand recursion" _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-04 16:31 ` Thamer Al-Harbash @ 2003-08-05 13:45 ` Joshua Judson Rosen 2003-08-05 17:29 ` Thamer Al-Harbash 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Joshua Judson Rosen @ 2003-08-05 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: guile-user [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 398 bytes --] On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 12:31:53PM -0400, Thamer Al-Harbash wrote: > On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Nic wrote: > > > I just think it would be a cool way of achieving the same things CPAN > > does. > > I'd sooner stick a needle in my eye than use a CPAN like system. Why is that? -- "Telling the truth to people who misunderstand you is generally promoting a falsehood, isn't it?" --A. Hope [-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 139 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-05 13:45 ` Joshua Judson Rosen @ 2003-08-05 17:29 ` Thamer Al-Harbash 2003-08-05 20:18 ` rm 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Thamer Al-Harbash @ 2003-08-05 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: guile-user On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Joshua Judson Rosen wrote: > On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 12:31:53PM -0400, Thamer Al-Harbash wrote: > > > I'd sooner stick a needle in my eye than use a CPAN like system. > > Why is that? Sorry for the knee jerk reaction. This isn't the forum to knock other packaging systems. There are too many reasons to list. I could probably discuss the pros and cons for hours. Suffice it to say that for operating systems which you want to ship to users and keep up to date yourself, using a packaging system with automatic dependency tracking is great. For a programming environment this is not the case. Making this inpersonal, automatic, and "always up to date" is not necessarily good. You go from shipping a really nice Scheme interpreter/library to shipping a virtual plastform. My own feeling is that there should be a maintainer or two that keeps track of stable guile software and keep a directory up to date. This process can also be automated by having programmers submit their projects for listing. We already have freshmeat, and the Free Software Directory. These two directories can serve this purpose well enough as it is. -- Thamer Al-Harbash GPG Key fingerprint: D7F3 1E3B F329 8DD5 FAE3 03B1 A663 E359 D686 AA1F "to understand recursion first one must understand recursion" _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-05 17:29 ` Thamer Al-Harbash @ 2003-08-05 20:18 ` rm 2003-08-05 20:41 ` Paul Jarc 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: rm @ 2003-08-05 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: guile-user, Joshua Judson Rosen On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 01:29:28PM -0400, Thamer Al-Harbash wrote: > On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Joshua Judson Rosen wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 12:31:53PM -0400, Thamer Al-Harbash wrote: > > > > > I'd sooner stick a needle in my eye than use a CPAN like system. > > > > Why is that? > > Sorry for the knee jerk reaction. This isn't the forum to knock > other packaging systems. > > There are too many reasons to list. I could probably discuss the > pros and cons for hours. Suffice it to say that for operating > systems which you want to ship to users and keep up to date > yourself, using a packaging system with automatic dependency > tracking is great. Are you refering to Debian's apt system (authomatic 'up-to-date') or to CPAN (Perl's package archive)? The two systems are arather different, esp. when it comes to the "issues" you mention. > For a programming environment this is not the case. Making this > inpersonal, automatic, and "always up to date" is not necessarily > good. You go from shipping a really nice Scheme > interpreter/library to shipping a virtual plastform. > > My own feeling is that there should be a maintainer or two that > keeps track of stable guile software and keep a directory up to > date. The idea of 'stable' is rather what apt tries. You do _not_ get software that is "up to date" but rather a stable snapshot, that sometimes can be (and often is) rather outdated (but stable). CPAN is just the other half of your suggestion: a list/directory of stable packages/modules (and by no means a platform). > This process can also be automated by having programmers > submit their projects for listing. We already have freshmeat, and > the Free Software Directory. These two directories can serve this > purpose well enough as it is. The one tempting thing about CPAN (and apt, here's where they meet) is the simple, unified build/install process -- either 'apt-get install foo' or CPAN's 'download / perl Makefile.PL / make / make install' process. [or, from the developer's side: a build system that helps to create a .dpkg or even a module that wraps the build/install process like MakeMaker.pm] Ralf Mattes > -- > Thamer Al-Harbash > GPG Key fingerprint: D7F3 1E3B F329 8DD5 FAE3 03B1 A663 E359 D686 AA1F > "to understand recursion first one must understand recursion" > > > _______________________________________________ > Guile-user mailing list > Guile-user@gnu.org > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-05 20:18 ` rm @ 2003-08-05 20:41 ` Paul Jarc 2003-08-05 20:48 ` Nic 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Paul Jarc @ 2003-08-05 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: guile-user, Joshua Judson Rosen rm@fabula.de wrote: > The one tempting thing about CPAN (and apt, here's where they meet) > is the simple, unified build/install process -- either 'apt-get install foo' > or CPAN's 'download / perl Makefile.PL / make / make install' process. Perl's MakeMaker means that the build system for a Perl module is the same as that of other Perl modules, but it's gratuitously different from that of all other packages. There's no reason that a package's build system should be based on the fact that it happens to be an extension of a particular scripting language. It's better to stick with an existing build system that people already know (e.g., autoconf, or whatever you would normally use for anything else). It makes sense to put together some rules (m4 macros for autoconf, or whatever) that can be reused for all modules for a particular scripting language, but there's no reason to stick the installing user with a different interface. paul _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-05 20:41 ` Paul Jarc @ 2003-08-05 20:48 ` Nic 2003-08-05 21:15 ` Paul Jarc 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nic @ 2003-08-05 20:48 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: guile-user prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes: > rm@fabula.de wrote: > > The one tempting thing about CPAN (and apt, here's where they meet) > > is the simple, unified build/install process -- either 'apt-get install foo' > > or CPAN's 'download / perl Makefile.PL / make / make install' process. > > Perl's MakeMaker means that the build system for a Perl module is the > same as that of other Perl modules, but it's gratuitously different > from that of all other packages. There's no reason that a package's > build system should be based on the fact that it happens to be an > extension of a particular scripting language. It's better to stick > with an existing build system that people already know (e.g., > autoconf, or whatever you would normally use for anything else). It > makes sense to put together some rules (m4 macros for autoconf, or > whatever) that can be reused for all modules for a particular > scripting language, but there's no reason to stick the installing user > with a different interface. Are you saying people don't understand apt/rpm/etc...? The thing that I was advocating about APT was the command line access to a directory of "packages". A common directory for tarballs would be a first step forward because we could write some nice tools to front end it. -- Nic Ferrier http://www.tapsellferrier.co.uk _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-05 20:48 ` Nic @ 2003-08-05 21:15 ` Paul Jarc 2003-08-05 22:16 ` Thamer Al-Harbash 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Paul Jarc @ 2003-08-05 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: guile-user, rm Nic <nferrier@tapsellferrier.co.uk> wrote: > prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes: >> Perl's MakeMaker means that the build system for a Perl module is the >> same as that of other Perl modules, but it's gratuitously different >> from that of all other packages. > > Are you saying people don't understand apt/rpm/etc...? No. Those types of things repackage existing code. No matter what build system I choose for packages I publish, someone else can come along and wrap it up in a .deb or .rpm. But users who install my package from my source tarball will get the same kind of interface for the build system, regardless of whether the package is a Guile extension or something else entirely. (It happens that I also think that apt/rpm/etc. are trying to solve a problem that can and should be solved upstream by the package maintainers themselves, but that's anoter topic.) > The thing that I was advocating about APT was the command line access > to a directory of "packages". A common directory for tarballs would > be a first step forward because we could write some nice tools to > front end it. As with the build system, I see no reason to restrict such a directory to Guile extensions. Make a directory to accomodate all packages, and let users query it with filters like "show me only Guile extensions", "show me only window managers", etc. Ideally, this would be integrated with slashpackage: <URL:http://cr.yp.to/slashpackage.html> paul _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-05 21:15 ` Paul Jarc @ 2003-08-05 22:16 ` Thamer Al-Harbash 2003-08-05 23:02 ` Paul Jarc 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Thamer Al-Harbash @ 2003-08-05 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: guile-user, rm, Nic On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Paul Jarc wrote: > (It happens that I also think > that apt/rpm/etc. are trying to solve a problem that can and should be > solved upstream by the package maintainers themselves, but that's > anoter topic.) Sadly this is very true. I wish I got a penny for every package maintainer who maintained his own set of patches and never notified the author of the fixes that were made. > Ideally, this would be integrated with slashpackage: > <URL:http://cr.yp.to/slashpackage.html> The problem with slashpackage, although it's a great idea, is that it ships to be used in a specific directory. Symlinking tricks aside, there are enough people who don't want a /package directory and that makes the adoption of slashpackage very slow. DJB created an alternate universe as opposed to a flexible set of tools. I feel guile shouldn't make the mistake of trying to create an alternate universe. GNU autoconf is a darned good tool right now for source distribution. -- Thamer Al-Harbash GPG Key fingerprint: D7F3 1E3B F329 8DD5 FAE3 03B1 A663 E359 D686 AA1F "to understand recursion first one must understand recursion" _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-05 22:16 ` Thamer Al-Harbash @ 2003-08-05 23:02 ` Paul Jarc 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Paul Jarc @ 2003-08-05 23:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: guile-user, rm, Nic Thamer Al-Harbash <tmh@whitefang.com> wrote: > On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Paul Jarc wrote: >> Ideally, this would be integrated with slashpackage: >> <URL:http://cr.yp.to/slashpackage.html> > > The problem with slashpackage, although it's a great idea, is > that it ships to be used in a specific directory. That property is a problem only aesthetically. On technical grounds, it's a major win. When there is more than one possible location for a file, there is a risk of finding the wrong file, etc. <URL:http://cr.yp.to/slashpackage/studies.html> > Symlinking tricks aside, there are enough people who don't want a > /package directory and that makes the adoption of slashpackage very > slow. Yes, it will be slow. But hopefully, in time its advantages will be better understood, and people will develop different aesthetic tastes. > DJB created an alternate universe as opposed to a flexible set > of tools. It's "alternate" in the sense of being different, but you aren't forced to reorganize your whole system if you just want to install one slashpackage-oriented package. And FWIW, the tools I've created to work with /package will also work with any path whose contents play by the same rules: <URL:http://multivac.cwru.edu./sptools/> paul _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: apt based package dist for guile? 2003-08-04 8:44 ` Nic 2003-08-04 16:31 ` Thamer Al-Harbash @ 2003-08-05 22:16 ` MJ Ray 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: MJ Ray @ 2003-08-05 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw) Nic <nferrier@tapsellferrier.co.uk> wrote: > I mean something exclusively for guile packages and probably > something outside of the Debian project. It would be more useful to have a cross-implementation system for extension modules. Something like an offspring of SLIB and CPAN, but avoiding the gnarly bits of both. Such a solution will almost inevitably be a 90% one, but better than the 0% one we have now. When I last looked at this, the lexmod code at http://www.bloodandcoffee.net/campbell/code/ and some way of downloading the "most appropriate" version for an implementation seemed like a good idea to me. Now, cue the flames from the guile fans who can't believe any other implementation is worth using for anything, or that the guile module system should be added to all others regardless of their differences. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know. http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ jabber://slef@jabber.at _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-08-05 23:02 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2003-08-01 11:32 apt based package dist for guile? Nic 2003-08-03 23:41 ` MJ Ray 2003-08-04 8:44 ` Nic 2003-08-04 16:31 ` Thamer Al-Harbash 2003-08-05 13:45 ` Joshua Judson Rosen 2003-08-05 17:29 ` Thamer Al-Harbash 2003-08-05 20:18 ` rm 2003-08-05 20:41 ` Paul Jarc 2003-08-05 20:48 ` Nic 2003-08-05 21:15 ` Paul Jarc 2003-08-05 22:16 ` Thamer Al-Harbash 2003-08-05 23:02 ` Paul Jarc 2003-08-05 22:16 ` MJ Ray
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).