[gobolinux-users] Source repositories and other suggestions

Martin Baldan martinobal at gmail.com
Sun Dec 3 23:22:22 UTC 2006

On 12/3/06, Michael Homer <gobo-users-dufus at wotfun.com> wrote:
> The reason I was thinking of a full tree is to make it easier to find
> a closest fit solution.

That sounds good.  I'm not sure how this closest fit search could be
implemented,or whether it would help or complicate things, but in any case,
I chose a lisp-like syntax because it readily translates to a tree. The
alphabetical ordering makes the name unique, so it can be easily indexed in
a table.

> That means you're going to have to wrap every program, which means
> you're going to have to patch them all individually and manually (how
> else will you know which binaries to wrap?). It also won't work on
> programs like sed or grep, that are used automatically during
> compilation and which will make compilation die if they wait for a
> prompt.

Well, no way I would propose to wrap every program. Doesn't the system know
when an application exited abnormally, or when it was closed/killed by the
user? At the very least, this kind of integration exists at the
desktop-environment level, and most users have some kind of desktop

BTW, I'm thinking of an option for user who don't want to be bothered: The
system sends a negative vote if the app exits abnormally. If the user closes
the application, the default is to send a possitive vote. If the user closed
it because it was misbehaving, he can easily send a failure report with the
name of the app, and this cancels the positive vote.

> That sort of database seems kind of... oblique. It is pretty much
> necessary to make this work, but it's not really desirable. I guess
> it'd be worth looking at how long it actually takes to build these and
> consider doing it on the fly. Or maybe saving it into
> /Programs/Foo/1.0 somewhere.

Yes, that's kind of what I proposed in my previous post. (for instance,

Jonatan's scheme would work, but realistically you'd have to do it
> manually - just copying/symlinking in the necessary libraries won't be
> enough in some cases that rely on knowledge of where they are to find
> companion files. There's still the wrapper problem too.
> Also, you won't be able to use SymlinkProgram (because all the added
> libraries would also try to be installed). It wouldn't be a
> show-stopper on its own, because of overwrite protection, but in any
> situation where you really did want to overwrite the files for a
> program you wouldn't be able to.
> -Michael

I see a partial analogy here, maybe it's not correct but anyway: some
applications make assumptions, in their installation scripts, about where
other programs (dependencies) are, and Gobolinux devs have to edit them to
change those assumptions. Individual binaries make assumptions about where
other binaries of the same program are located. These assumptions could also
be changed (in principle), but it would be much more hackish, because they
are universally considered safe assumptions, and there's no clean way to do
it, no equivalent of "--prefix"(or is there one?). So, I think it's safer to
store this info under /Programs/foo/1.0/Resources.

- -Martin

> gobolinux-users mailing list
> gobolinux-users at lists.gobolinux.org
> http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.gobolinux.org/pipermail/gobolinux-users/attachments/20061204/6f3df4ca/attachment-0001.htm 

More information about the gobolinux-users mailing list