[highos at highos.com: Re: Fwd: Re: More detailed profile]
Jesse Tie Ten Quee
highos at highos.com
Fri Sep 1 06:41:08 PDT 2000
----- Forwarded message from Jesse Tie Ten Quee <highos at highos.com> -----
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 09:20:01 -0400
From: Jesse Tie Ten Quee <highos at highos.com>
To: Gerard Beekmans <gerard at linuxfromscratch.org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: More detailed profile
Reply-To: Jesse Tie Ten Quee <highos at highos.com>
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 07:50:38PM -0400, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, you wrote:
> > I'm all for creating "a better make" specifically for the purposes of
> > building packages. Yes, a makefile can do anything, but it isn't the
> > fastest way to capture the essence of building a package. I dislike
> > make...it's not straightforward & obvious enough.
> > That said, could someone enumerate the reasons why RPM or APT aren't
> > considered? I know they won't work for the static build phase...what
> > are the specific advantages this new alternative provides? If this
> > has been discussed before, how about a link?
> In essence this profile, profiler and the front-end+back-end put together
> result in our own packaging system. I'd like to create our own package system
Ya know... the more i think about it the more i like this.
In reality this isn't a package manager the way we have all come to know it.
You're not making a package of binaries (or src) were basiclly making a Makefile that's portable (hrm..yeah) allthough alot more flexible.
> >From Scratch (tm - yeah I should trademark that eh? ;).
I've told him once before =)
----- End forwarded message -----
Jesse Tie Ten Quee - highos at highos dot com
More information about the alfs-discuss