From: fox AT cat DOT nyu DOT edu (David Fox) Subject: Re: GNU-Win32 distribution question 14 May 1998 01:47:30 -0700 Message-ID: References: <199805130729 DOT IAA03626 AT linux DOT compd DOT com> To: gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com "Kevin F. Quinn" writes: > With respect to source distributions - I don't see that there's > anything wrong with the "gzipped tarball" approach. One problem with gzipped tarballs for source distribution is that if developers are making RPMs for binary distributions, making a gzipped tarball source distribution is more of an annoyance than simply uploading the source RPM that automatically results from building the binary RPM. Furthermore, source RPMs encode the build instructions for a package in a form that is directly usable by the machine, while with tarballs the developer is expected to provide a prose description of the build and install procedure. For me as a user, using such a description is more time consuming and less foolproof than using the source RPM. For me as a developer, source RPMs are a more effective way to manage cross-platform software systems. -- David Fox http://www.cat.nyu.edu/fox xoF divaD NYU Media Research Lab fox AT cat DOT nyu DOT edu baL hcraeseR aideM UYN - For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".