Poll about package management

[Greg Schafer]

Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:

> I use the following features provided by a package manager:
> [x] Knowing where each file comes from
> [x] Clean uninstallation of a package
> [x] Removal of obsolete files when upgrading to a new version
> [ ] Ability to upgrade toolchain components (most notably, glibc) painlessly
> [x] Ability to revert mistakes easily and quickly by installing an old
> binary package
> [x] Ability to compile once, deploy on many macines
> [x] Scripting the build

[x] file conflict detection  <-- essential feature
[x] simple BLFS style dependencies  <-- essential feature
[x] pre/post install scripts  <-- essential feature
[x] ability to build the whole distro as non-root  <-- killer feature
[x] "meta" package support (package groups)
[x] knowledge of which packages are pulled in as dependencies and which
are installed explicitly

BTW, Pacman does all of the above. I receive more than the odd mail
from folks thanking me for pointing out Pacman to them. Most folks who see
the Pacman "light" realize it is absolutely tailor-made for our
demographic, not too complex, not too simple. Having said that, I believe
PM should be a personal thing, which is why I would never advise anyone
"you must XYZ as your PM". ie: I would never select a default PM for LFS.

Regards
Greg
-- 
http://www.diy-linux.org/