"ext Andrew Flegg" <andrew@xxxxxxxx> writes: > More information on the problem/use-case of the cross-domain package > would be useful, I think. The package domains are an effort to simulate a sane distribution on the device: in a sane distribution, a given package is available only from one source. For example, if you need modifications to libfarsight for your in-house enterprise application (that's a real world example), you can not just go and make your own version of libfarsight. You need to coordinate and cooperate with the maintainer of the existing libfarsight library and (ideally) get him to include your modifications. This is something that concerns developers and the maintainers of the distribution. They need to figure this out between themselves. We can not leave it to the user to decide whether this rogue version of libfarsight is OK, but this other one is not. Thus, we do not even inform the user about the problem, all rogue versions of libfarsight are simply ignored. (In the Application manager, apt-get doesn't care.) A similar thing will likely happen with "missing packages". Once I have robustified the Application manager to give more reliable error messages, I will likely just reword the "Some packages are missing" error message into "This package is broken" or "The catalogues are broken". Again, the users should not get the impression that missing packages is something that they can fix (by hunting them down somewhere on the internets, say). Missing packages mean that the distribution is broken and developers need to fix it. But, the path the hell is paved with good intentions, and the package domain system has good chance of getting in the way of people who know what they are doing. That's why you can switch it off in red-pill mode. _______________________________________________ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@xxxxxxxxx https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
