From: Tom Clarke <tom@...2i.com>
Date: 2002-11-09T08:21:18+09:00
Subject: Re: CPAN Style installer


Could this maybe done without using sym-links.

I notice that a convension is emerging to package files in a directory 
named after the package name. E.g.:
	site-ruby/1.6/mypackage.rb
	site-ruby/1.6/mypackage/supportlib1.rb
	site-ruby/1.6/mypackage/supportlib2.rb
	site-ruby/1.6/mypackage/supportlib3.rb

What if something like a index.html was allowed so that:
	site-ruby/1.6/mypackage/index.rb

was allowed?

If it was, a smart installer could automatically put badly behaving 
libraries in a sub dir.

Would this work?

-Tom

On Sat, 9 Nov 2002, Yohanes Santoso wrote:

> Austin Ziegler <austin@halostatue.ca> writes:
> 
> > On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 07:24:10 +0900, Yohanes Santoso wrote:
> > > why the lucky stiff <ruby-talk@whytheluckystiff.net> writes:
> > >> I wonder. Is it fair to simply install these directly in
> > >> $prefix/lib/ruby/site_ruby/$version? (aka
> > >> Config::CONFIG['sitelibdir'])
> > > I have a suggestion: why not install each package to its own
> > > directory, then foreach file in the package, make a link to
> > > $prefix/lib/ruby/site_ruby/$version/.
> > 
> > Doesn't work with Windows.
> 
> Well, the rational is this: if you ever want to manually scrap a
> package and update it, just delete a directory. Why would you want to
> update it manually? Because sometimes, you really need the latest
> package (which may not be compatible with the previous version and
> requires thoroughly scrapping the old ones), but the package in
> raa-suc (or whatever) is a bit outdated.
> 
> Without putting each package in its own directory, removing old files
> from a package involves a fair amount of hunting and guess work.
> 
> > IMO, it is fair to install them in the appropriate place.
> 
> The question is not whether it's fair or not. After all lots of
> systems already stuff everything in one place (witness /usr/bin). The
> question is whether we allow cruft/bad practice to continue or not.
> 
> The good thing from a packager like Debian's is it allows you to find
> out all the files of a package ('dpkg -L perl' would list all files
> from the perl package) and allows thorough uninstall. The bad thing is
> it requires the package builder to manually/semi-automatically
> identify all files.
> 
> So, instead, the easiest way is to stuff a package in its own
> directory. The advantage is you can have two version of the same
> package installed which sometimes comes in handy. To use a particular
> version, just link it in (see GNU stow
> http://www.gnu.org/software/stow/stow.html). 
> 
> I'm not too sure about windows, but I think if you use libcygwin, you
> can do file linking. Alternatively, ruby's include path could be
> appended with the appropriate package directory for each installed
> package.
> 
> Just my 2c.
> YS.
> 
> 
>