Re: [MiNT] old KGMD or new NMD?

[Konrad Kokoszkiewicz <draco@mi.com.pl>]

> On Fri, Feb 05, 1999 at 05:42:57PM +0100, Konrad Kokoszkiewicz wrote:
> > Almost any port for any distribution for any Unix results with diff files.
> > Don't think you'll get rid of them.
> 
> If we get autoconf etc. to support MinT, many major packages should compile
> without and patches, provided we use standard paths.

Autoconf can change anything, including the paths. Actually, I compiled
ircd some time ago and it was only the question of tuning the config.h.
But well, this was running a REAL autoconf, which actually didn't rely on
user input, but tested the systems features extensively.

Anyways, as I said some time before, I'll accomodate to the majority.
I expressed my point and may accept an opinion that the change will not be
so critically dangerous for consistency of MiNT setups, as I initially was
thinking. But still, I'll personally keep my KGMD as long as possible,
just there;s currently no point to fix it (it = this particular setup,
i.e. mine).
 
> > >    b) start with a distribution that is up-to-date and fully functional.
> > 
> > But non-standard. And you now exspect (I already told you that once) that
> 
> Um - no. The old KGND is non-standard by todays definition of standard.

"todays" maybe. I must admit that should write rather "unusual" than
"non-standard".
 
> > way. So, if we loose compatibility between MiNT setups, a mess will be
> > made without any rational reason (because, as I did explain my point,
> > changing FS structure just because someone calls it "obsolete", is not
> > rational).
> 
> The only place I see where the FS layout will cause problems to old binaries
> should be fixable with symlinks.

I wish i was always so optimistic.
 
> > Yeah. In worst case, this will require recompiling almost all the existing
> > software. And look at the FTP servers: PIWO has over 200 MB of MiNT stuff
> 
> Which is a good thing, because it makes sure that current libraries are used,
> and that the software *does* compile at all on a current system.
> 
> > in tar.gz files (guess about 0.5 gig after unpacking). Will you recompile
> > all that? And so, will FTP servers keep same stuff twice, just because
> > "pppd for KGMD" and "pppd for NMD" has differ with 1 hardcoded pathname?
> > This is pure waste of time and disk space.
> 
> A distribution will have to include all standard packages, so that you can
> install it without problems - I would not want to have to search for 100
> single packages, whcih are located on different servers, in order to install
> my system - I want a distribution somewhere which I can download and
> install.

I didn't mean distribution packages, this is not a problem to keep as many
distributions as we like (PIWO has almost empty disk). I mean keeping the
ports of addons twice or more, like:

pine-7.35-beta-KGMD.tar.gz
pine-7.35-beta-NMD.tar.gz
pine-7.35-beta-YAMD.tar.gz (yet another mint distr...)

etc.

But anyways, I'll accomodate to the majority.

--
Konrad M.Kokoszkiewicz
|mail: draco@mi.com.pl                  | Atari Falcon030/TT030/65XE |
|http://www.obta.uw.edu.pl/~draco/
|http://draco.atari.org

** Ea natura multitudinis est,
** aut servit humiliter, aut superbe dominatur (Liv. XXIV,25)
*************************************************************
** U pospolstwa normalne jest, ze albo sluzy ono unizenie,
** albo bezczelnie sie panoszy.