From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT tudor21 DOT net>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: DJGPP Setup Utility in the making.
Date:	Tue, 08 Feb 2000 19:27:16 +0000
Organization:	Customer of Planet Online
Lines:	28
Message-ID:	<38A06E14.29AD52CC@tudor21.net>
References:	<87jegs02e44 AT enews2 DOT newsguy DOT com> <389DAEE6 DOT 5B0550A5 AT tudor21 DOT net> <389EC8D9 DOT 1A02AA45 AT softhome DOT net> <jkut9s831tukb0jbcno5sj890i73ko3c0r AT 4ax DOT com> <389F175F DOT 9EC378DE AT softhome DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	modem-191.indium.dialup.pol.co.uk
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk 950038305 540 62.136.40.191 (8 Feb 2000 19:31:45 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	8 Feb 2000 19:31:45 GMT
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT theplanet DOT net
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
> AFAIK, Richard has looked into this problem too,
> and came to conclusion that writing DJGPP-oriented
> utility is better than porting.

Yes, I did look at porting. I have not ported many programs using DJGPP - 
a couple of network apps like sitecopy. So, my porting experience is
limited. However, it looked like I would have to port several packages
just to get to the point of porting the actual package manager. I decided
that I'd prefer to write my own one.

I tried both rpm and dpkg. I think rpm actually completed its configure
script, but I can't remember how far it got through the source. Not far
enough for me too continue trying to port it.

I also decided it would be interesting to write a DJGPP installer. It
hopefully won't have all the baggage that dpkg, rpm have (although there
has to be some point for the baggage ;) ).

Laurynas, did you have a go at porting rpm too?

Bye,

-- 
Richard Dawe
richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com ICQ 47595498 http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/

- Raw text -