Re: [MiNT] old KGMD or new NMD?

[Michael Schwingen <rincewind@discworld.dascon.de>]

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.

> >    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.

> (for example) I will wipe my perfectly working, upgraded and configured
> KGMD setup just to install a new distribution, which won't work better for
> sure (it may at least work as good as my current setup). Sorry, but this
> assumption (that I will reinstall everything from scratch without any
> reson to) is not reasonable. I think that several people may think same

I *would* install a new distribution, provided it has a useful filesystem
layout, with the benefits of
 - standard library names
 - a current compiler, without the need of fiddling with specs files etc. by
   hand
 - all binaries recompiled against a current MiNTlib
 - sources / diffs provided for all packages, so that I can easily
   recompile/modify any part of the distribution, without needing to search
   for the original sources and diffs (if they are available).

A package management system (like dpkg) would be a big benefit, but not
required.

> 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.

> 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.

Your point may be true for 'add-ons', but all fairly standard stuff (and
pppd definitely belongs in that category) should be included in the
distribution anyway.

The point is not to make you upgrade your system - the point is providing a
working, current distribution for new installations, and if you do that, you
can do it right.

cu
Michael
-- 
Michael Schwingen, Ahornstrasse 36, 52074 Aachen