From: Richard Dawe Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: DJGPP Setup Utility in the making. Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 19:27:16 +0000 Organization: Customer of Planet Online Lines: 28 Message-ID: <38A06E14.29AD52CC@tudor21.net> References: <87jegs02e44 AT enews2 DOT newsguy DOT com> <389DAEE6 DOT 5B0550A5 AT tudor21 DOT net> <389EC8D9 DOT 1A02AA45 AT softhome DOT net> <389F175F DOT 9EC378DE AT softhome DOT net> NNTP-Posting-Host: modem-191.indium.dialup.pol.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk 950038305 540 62.136.40.191 (8 Feb 2000 19:31:45 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Feb 2000 19:31:45 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. Laurynas Biveinis wrote: > AFAIK, Richard has looked into this problem too, > and came to conclusion that writing DJGPP-oriented > utility is better than porting. Yes, I did look at porting. I have not ported many programs using DJGPP - a couple of network apps like sitecopy. So, my porting experience is limited. However, it looked like I would have to port several packages just to get to the point of porting the actual package manager. I decided that I'd prefer to write my own one. I tried both rpm and dpkg. I think rpm actually completed its configure script, but I can't remember how far it got through the source. Not far enough for me too continue trying to port it. I also decided it would be interesting to write a DJGPP installer. It hopefully won't have all the baggage that dpkg, rpm have (although there has to be some point for the baggage ;) ). Laurynas, did you have a go at porting rpm too? Bye, -- Richard Dawe richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com ICQ 47595498 http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/