On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 06:10:36PM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Help create properly autotooled rpm transparently for people that don't > care about infrastructure stuff. You already have cluster managers that > use rpm as a payload. That takes care of the deployment, of the > interfering stuff in /usr/local, etc Ok, I am not really knowledgable on that matters. Is there something viewable, usable? > You focus too much on the current technical solution and not enough on > user needs. The problem is not to replicate the same old & broken > solution ad vitam eternam but to make the correct technical solution > attractive enough for users to switch. I am very open to new solutions, but the use of static libs is not necessarily broken in all cases. > I won't share nuggets of ass-backwards common wisdom here, I don't understand that sentence, ca donne quoi en francais ? > that would > strike to close to my employer systems, but sometimes you need to > re-asses why a particular solution was chosen at a time and if you can > not achieve the original goals better now with stuff that was not > available a decade ago. Once again I am open to new stuff, but I haven't seen anything that would be as simple and effective as building statically (in the case of specific scientific apps I am referring to, of course). And the long thread on fedora-devel only comfort that view since people complained about dstatically compiling but only proposed very complicated alternatives. If those alternatives can be automated and give the same advantages, it could become usable, but currently this is not the case (or nobody pointed to the right solution). -- Pat -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
