[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Dependency loops considered harmful?

Matej Cepl wrote:
> On 2008-09-03, 23:41 GMT, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> That works for a Mom and Pop desktop but doesn't work as 
>> a developer's workstation.  When developing software you might 
>> need a library that does Foo.  Look on the system, hey, I can 
>> use libFoo!  A few weeks later, when you remove Gnome-Foo from 
>> your system because your shiny new  application does the job, 
>> your app suddenly can't find libFoo....
> No, you would still find libFoo, because yum would still have 
> recorded that libFoo was directly installed, and not just to 
> satisfy dependency on Gnome-foo. Don't say it is not possible, 
> when it was working (and I were using it) for years on Debian.
You're misunderstanding the scenario. libFoo is not directly installed.
 It's installed to satisfy the dependency for Gnome-Foo.  But after it's
installed, I start looking for something that let's me develop a new
program that does Foo.  libFoo is installed on my system so I start
using it to create my app.

This is possibly more pronounced in the world of scripting languages
where runtime and development bits are one and the same package.

> Moreover, even if it didn't help your developer (and I claim that 
> it would), I would still prefer solution which cures problems of 
> at least normal users and wouldn't help developers (who should 
> now how to fix their system).
In my reply to Callum Lerwick I pointed out that this is a fallacy.
Developers != System Administrators.  Developers are end-users just like
Mom and Pop firefox+openoffice users.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]