Tom Hughes wrote:
> That hasn't stopped us saying that they don't provide a good experience
> to Fedora users however, and that it is better to repackage things as
> RPMs so that our users only have to deal with a single interface to
> installing and updating packages and that they will get a set of
> packages customised (where necessary) to all work nicely together
+1
I think that "native" upstream packaging systems, which I call NON-native
packaging systems (RPM is native, everything else is not) are not the way to
go. They fail particularly whenever something needs to be compiled. Some
(e.g. DKMS, or R packages containing native code, or common-lisp-controller)
even go as far as compiling code on the user's system, which defeats the
purpose of a precompiled distribution entirely. Even for scripting
languages, bytecode compilation is often necessary or at least beneficial,
and the bytecode depends on the version of the scripting language (and thus
on the distribution and its version).
So there is really no way around packages compiled natively for the
distribution, i.e., in our case, RPMs.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
