[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-debian
Subject:    Re: Installing 3rd party packages, apt URIs
From:       Marcin Pawlik <wapkil () o2 ! pl>
Date:       2004-01-19 14:53:12
Message-ID: 20040119145312.GA29755 () mpmain
[Download RAW message or body]

On Mon, Jan 19 at 12:10, Kevin Krammer wrote:
> On Monday 19 January 2004 11:47, Marcin Pawlik wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 18 at 22:10, Kevin Krammer wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > > Now the idea or question is: can we come up with a schema for an
> > > URI for apt sources that can be put on webpages instead of the
> > > download link.  So that, for example, I could go to sourceforge,
> > > search for a program, click on an "apt link" in the results and
> > > have it added to my sources list.
> >
> > And have your system destroyed after the next upgrade.
> 
> I don't get this.
> 
> > Adding additional sources of packages (having installation scripts
> > executed with root rights, overwriting existing system files etc.)
> > should be possible only for the administrator and should be done
> > only after careful source check. Making it happen in easy and
> > invisible for the user way is definitely not a good idea.
> 
> Of course that would only work for root.  Do you think Kaptive runs as
> a normal user?
> 
> The protocol handler woudl obviously need to invoke a kdesu command
> for the installation manager.

I don't know what Kaptive is but your proposition would work for any
user who has write permission to /etc/apt/sources.list. Currently it is
only root but of course it can (but shouldn't) be changed.

> Adding a source permanetly could only be one option, I don't have enough 
> knowledge about apt-get, but maybe it can be given an editional file or an 
> additonal repository on the commandline.

Yes, you can specify different sources.list file location.

> It doens't have to use apt-get at all, purpose of this thread is to
> dicuss possible means of letting a user leverage the advantages of a
> package system instead of forcing him/her to the old style
> download&install, which only works properly if you make huge packages
> that contain all dependencies.

Or ones depending only on packages present in official repositories, but
I understand the problem.

> I am a Debian user. I like the way I can install software, i.e. that
> the first KDE application triggers download and install of kdelibs,
> but any further KDE application only has its _additonal_ dependencies.
> No longer do I have to download XX MB installers that virutall all
> contain the same base libs.
> 
> I have a broadband internet connection but installing software on
> windows still sucks, because of those non-coordinated packages.
> 
> IMHO one of the major advantages of Debian is its fantastic package
> philosphy (small packages with dependencies)

The second important advantage is its stability. If you use unofficial
repositories you give the repository creator root rights on your
machine. If there is, intentionally or not, something wrong with it you
risk loosing your system. The same goes of course for manual .deb
installation but it's not automatic nor persistent. In the case of
source.list changes the repository becomes packages source until you
remove it from there and its packages are upgraded and installed in the
standard way people trust and don't watch so close. That's why I'm sure
there should be no option of easy and automatic source.list changes you
proposed.

On the other hand if you think about something like alternative file
with additional repositories which is used only when the user
explicitly asks for it, confirms that understands it's unofficial and
may result in system destruction and the installation procedure for it
shows in details what would happen if packages from there are taken,
then Ok, why not.

Regards,

-- 
Marcin Pawlik
_______________________________________________
kde-debian mailing list
kde-debian@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-debian
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]