delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/06/20/18:00:19

From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: gmp Attention: Eli Z
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:20:47 +0100
Organization: Customer of Planet Online
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <394F619F.A605E302@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 21 DOT 0006200512210 DOT 1585-100000 AT roadrunner DOT grendel DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: modem-115.amantadine.dialup.pol.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: news6.svr.pol.co.uk 961508412 32046 62.136.77.115 (20 Jun 2000 13:40:12 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Jun 2000 13:40:12 GMT
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT theplanet DOT net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, The awesome and feared Eli Zaretskii commented
> thusly,
> > But only if package maintainers put the appropriate *.dsm files into
> > the distributions.  From my experience, crafting a good .dsm file is
> > not a trivial job...
> 
> This would be nice, but it is not absolutely necessary, for example
> zippo comes with several DSM's for DJGPP ports already. Surely it can
> search the package for a DSM and if it isn't found it can use one of the
> DSM's that have been included with it (zippo) quite easily?

This is true, but then it puts most of the work on us, the zippo
developers. I was hoping that the package maintainers would also help out
by writing DSMs for their packages. After all, they are more likely to
have an idea of what dependencies exist & problems that are likely to be
encountered installing/uninstalling/upgrading/downgrading. Most of the
DSMs I have written were just "quick hacks" with some major refinements
done by Laurynas.

The "standalone" DSMs that come with zippo exist for these reasons:

1. They were needed to get the project started. ;)
2. Having to re-download a package when the DSM changes is irritating. (*)
3. You might just want to browse them and look at the dependencies.

(*) I discovered that the libsocket 0.7.4 beta 4 DSMs are broken. I will
distribute new ones some time in the future.

IMO in the future I think there will be a transition from standalone DSMs
to DSMs in packages. Standalone DSMs will then still have a place - group
packages & updates - but less important.

Of course, if standalone DSMs are desirable then it may just be better to
distribute them as well, say in a "DJGPP DSMs" package (which could be
installed using zippo ;) ).

Bye,

-- 
Richard Dawe
[ mailto:richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com | http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/ ]

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019