3 ms·
Don't forget the classic non package maintainer mistake of thinking policy = package file type/format. Its pretty trivial to "force" a rpm to install on a Debi
by VLM 12y ago
Don't forget the classic non package maintainer mistake of thinking policy = package file type/format.
Its pretty trivial to "force" a rpm to install on a Debian box. That doesn't mean that magically any of it will follow Debian policy, any of the paths will be correct, any of the dependencies will be correct. But technically files can be thrown onto the filesystem, even if they can't actually be used where they land. And vice versa, if you shove a deb onto a Redhat box.
My biggest "NIH" surprise is GNU has this and the emacs package system and at first glance they have nothing in common. The idea of installing a local copy of Rails or Leiningen off Emacs MELPA is kinda weird. I wonder if emacs twenty...something will use a user level version of this system. That would be interestingly consistent.
- taylanub 12y agoGuix is a big effort at making a purely functional package manager with a large recipe database and all kinds of bells and whistles you want in a full operating system. Emacs's minimal package manager is to install Elisp libraries (and nothing else) on every platform where Emacs runs, including MS Windows, and you can be happy it does dependency tracking. The two can't really be compared. Maybe in 10 years Guix will run on all platforms and have its components separated in such a way that it's sensible for Emacs to ship a version of Guix with it for Elisp package management, but don't hold your breath. So I don't think NIH applies there.