SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
There are very valid points brought forward in this thread. I sort of agree with the concept of warnings for dependencies or having some mechanism that installs only required dependencies, instead of having to install all libs or entire package groups just for a few apps to work.
As mentioned above, I don't think it would be possible for Mr V to maintain packages for every single application or library that anyone could possibly use. Linuxpackages.net does a pretty good job of that anyway. However, if we could have an official dependency warning tool included in the basic distribution, and an easy to use, open specification for listing the dependencies, then the third-party packagers would be able to provide the necessary dependency information themselves, wouldn't they?
What's wrong about dependencies? I've never had any problems, just ./configure and you'll find out what you miss, then get the packages and install. I would rather do that, than have a program doing stuff that I dont have any control over... Slackware rocks!
Please read the previous posts! What I was suggesting was that, if you use a command line tool to install .tgz packages, it could check dependencies for you and (optionally) warn if any were missing. Not install them for you, just let you know they are needed. Like you, I don't like delegating the update procedure to a script or other automated process, but I see nothing wrong with giving the user the information they need to make their decisions rather than have them hunt around for it... (see also: 'geek-hair-shirt' et al. </tongueincheek>)
Originally posted by erraticassassin Just a thought, but does Pat Volkerding ever look at these forums?
i think he does... check this out:
Quote:
This site runs our favorite Slackware questions forum. If you have general Slackware-related questions or need help, this is a great place to join in discussions with a user community that's friendly and eager to help.
but still, i really doubt he'll add some kinda dependancy feature to the standard slackware distro anytime soon, and IMHO that's a good thing... slackware's always been about giving people the least amount of binary distro tools to work with, and turning pkgtool into an apt look-alike would be ill, IMHO... dependancy features should be optional on slackware, not standard... that's how things are right now anyways, so why fix it if it ain't broken??
It's not necessarily broken, but just coz things were done a certain way sometime ago doesn't mean that you have to stick with to the same thing coz you have to progress.
Originally posted by ringwraith I don't think I would construe him directing people to come here for free suport with him actually coming here and reading the forums.
Good point, however, I think that it does show that he is aware of the LQ community and puts more trust in LQ for slackware issues than other places, so he must at least have some knowledge of the who's who among linux forums.
I think that these ideas are great.
Now I'm just beginning to become interested in shell scripts but it seems to me that it wouldn't take much to make a script that ran a few commands and displayed the results of the packages that one would need for a certain program. The command line is powerful enough and even though I have not come close to using it properly, in my ignorance it seems as though it would be relatively simple.
I'd just like to throw in my 2 cents:
yeah SOME kind of dependency checker would be nice. maybe if the .tgz file just contained a list of packages needed, written by the developer. then installpkg would just look at the installed libraries, the required libraries, and tell the user if there's any problems but NOT download or install anything more than the original specified package. making the list of required packages could probably even be automated and built in to Kdevelop, Ajunta, and other tools.
Originally posted by dns21 Slackware is made simple. It seems to me that if I wanted a computer that made decisions for me, I would run windows. If slack doesn't make you happy, try debian.
Not sure how figuring out my own dependencies can be called simple. It could be called 'basic' or 'bare'. But I do like it!
Originally posted by gmartin Not sure how figuring out my own dependencies can be called simple. It could be called 'basic' or 'bare'. But I do like it!
I didn't intend to call figuring out dependencies simple, however, I do entirely agree with your description of basic and bare. I was merely describing the distro as a whole, which I have understood to be complicated merely because of the simplicity which contradicts the complexity to a point. That is probably the best that I could word it but I am sure that every slacker could derive my intentions from it (hopefuly).
After reading some posts above I become a bit sad.
Swaret hacks or manual retrieval of missing linked libraries followed by guess-game of proper package name finding "solves" only small set of problems with broken dependencies. Sometimes programs load libraries at runtime and previous hacks are barehanded. Did you ever tried to upgrade f.E. KDE 3.2 to KDE 3.3.1 from Slackware-current (missing libidn) ? And some programs just don't require right libraries but are dependant otherwise, f.E. app direct calling at ghostscript frontends, supporting data files, etc. Idea to solve these problems with full installs is funny, nonsystematic and waste of resources and in many cases just don't work.
When you run your Slack on one desktop with a bit of additional work, you can keep your system running. But if you wish to deploy it to LAN with many w-stations/servers, you lost real chances to keep them all up-to-date (at least security updates) despite of administrator knowledge and experience.
It's so terribly hard and unacceptable to have in slackware package in install directory in addition 1 - 3 small files completely ignored by current pkgtools that may
make life of many admins so easier ? It's a myth you lost any control over package installation. You still have it completely in your hands, just aren't forced to be a detective. See how ArchLinux solved it's package management system. Unfortunately it has a very short history and it's development is too much oriented to bleeding edge. But that's different story ...
i don't see what the big deal is... if you need all that automation you can always install debian, which is more stable and secure than slackware anyways - traits which make debian the favorite for mission-critical servers...
the fact is that most slackers actually appreciate the absence of automated package tools (and other fluff) in slackware - it's one of the reasons why so many people choose slackware instead of one of the mainstream distros...
also, there's nothing holding anybody back from making a slackware-based distro with full package automation... and why stop there?? throw in a GUI installer, a mandrake-style control center, a heavily-patched kernel, i686 optimization, some wizards and druids, along with anything else you want... it's all good, really...
but seriously, some of us actually like doing detective work, at least on our personal machines...
and i think it's good to work with different distros for different situations, instead of trying to turn one distro into a one-size-fits-all kinda thing...
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.