On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:18:21 +0100
"Yury V. Zaytsev" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Vis. "waste days on recompiling packages from older source archives"
> > -- no, I just find the homepage, download the source tarball, and
> > compile it according to my preferences. I do not have a hard time
> > determining and accounting for prereqs.
> I guess you have never compiled anything requiring more than 3 libraries
> then. Try a static build of VLC (or, say, qtiplot, anyone?) for starters
> and than report back.
No, I've done the "linux from scratch" thing, actually, which means building a
new glibc, bootstrap-rebuilding gcc, etc, then every other single library after
that. Not that I do that often (or want to), but it's been done and I honestly
almost prefer building from source; on my current install X is from the distro
but the entire gtk chain is source built, partially because I have a public
project involving gtk so it's curiousity. I rebuild the kernel all the time,
my system is always totally stable, I have no problem "forcing" in higher level
packages on top of that.
So yeah, I kind of sneer at a lot of the install systems that have developed in
the past decade (those years I spent travelling must have been big ones in
linux development!) altho this sneer is completely ridiculous and unjustified.
I am coming to appreciate the ease and dynamism of it all.
Certainly, mc belongs near the center of the linux universe. But I'm still
sure that 2 DVD fedora set was designed by them to fit their graphical install
system, which is a little crass but I imagine does a fine job of quickly and
easily installing some generic style systems (just mc was not on any of them
;P). RHEL I would point out is more specifically a commercial server product
and I would hope any server I have to connect to has mc available, so good for
MK <[email protected]>
C/perl & web programmer
Mc mailing list