Message-Id: <200007280723.KAA05744@mailgw1.netvision.net.il> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:22:57 +0200 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.2.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5b From: "Eli Zaretskii" CC: zippo-workers AT egroups DOT com, kalum AT lintux DOT cx, lauras AT softhome DOT net, djgpp AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: <39808DD4.D9212891@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> (message from Richard Dawe on Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:30:28 +0100) Subject: Re: [zippo-workers] Re: ANNOUNCE: DJGPP port of GNU Make 3.79.1 uploaded References: <39808DD4 DOT D9212891 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:30:28 +0100 > From: Richard Dawe > > > > The default DSMs must be so general that they are useless. We might > > as well ask that zippo be able to install without any DSM anywhere in > > sight. All it takes is unzip the package and pray... > > I think there's a bit of confusion here. I think Kalum is referring to the > DSMs that are distributed with zippo. I understand that, and those were the DSMs I was referring to as well. > On the to-do list is a way of > matching the ZIP file name to its parent package, when the ZIP file does > not contain a DSM. That way a user could do e.g.: > > zippo -i sed302b.zip > > sed302b.zip does not (IIRC) contain a DSM. Since zippo has a small > database of available packages, it could scan this and match sed302b.zip > to the parent DSM. Then it knows how to install sed. Why would zippo need a DSM file to know ``how to install a package''? A simple installation boils down to just unzipping the package over the old files, and that's it; there's no need for a DSM for this. Anything smarter than a simple unzip must require a non-trivial DSM file which cannot possibly come with zippo, unless you, the zippo maintainers, invest a lot of effort into writing up such non-trivial DSMs. (If you do that, those DSMs might as well be simply added to the *.zip files on SimTel.NET, instead of waiting for maintainers to do so. ;-) In other words, I was arguing that the default DSMs must be simple enough to not convey anything but the ``common-knowledge'' type of info, which is hardly specific to the packages. Such a common knowledge might as well be simply built into zippo to begin with. Am I missing something?