From: "Peña, Botp" <botp@...>
Date: 2004-08-13T17:27:40+09:00
Subject: Re: ruvi 0.4.11

Mauricio Fern�ndez [mailto:batsman.geo@yahoo.com] wrote kindly:

> 
> There is a limit to what RPA can provide before becoming a 
> cross-OS distribution :) Consider the following: if I package 
> ruby-gnome2, should I package gtk too? And all the other 
> gnome libs too? Will I finally have to package libc too ;), 
> for several Linux distros, FreeBSD, DragonFly BSD, Mac OSX, 
> Win XP, Win 2k, just to mention the platforms where I know 
> rpa-base has been run on? In other words, at some point it 
> has to rely on the functionality provided by the host OS. On 
> systems with a native package manager, it will take care of 
> the rest. If you're on win32, you'll have to get the required 
> libs yourself _or_ build a large team able to package lots of 
> stuff for win32, as a spinoff of RPA (if only cause RPA will 
> have the appropriate infrastructures, in time) or 
> independently, if you want
> *all* the libs you could ever need to be packaged.
> 
> In this particular case, there is a chance RPA will 
> distribute curses binaries for win32 once I get the binary 
> repos. up and implement signed packages/ports, but it's 
> already nearing the limits of what RPA can reasonably be.
> 

Yes, you're right, sir batsman, and I'm sorry (but if you can package win
curses that would be godsend). RPA spoiled me on installs that I got lost on
the fundamentals. So lost that I was even planning to ask you if rpa can
update ruby itself =) (me cowers under the table :-)...

> -- 
> Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
> batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com
> 

kind regards -botp