[64bit] Biber packaging questions
Tue Jun 18 22:51:00 GMT 2013
On 2013-06-15 07:37, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Reini Urban writes:
>> If you really want to maintain 2000+ packages do it. I don't care.
> Nobody suggested that all of a sudden Cygwin should come with all CPAN
> distributions pre-bundled. My current guess, based on my own usage,
> would be on the order of 300 packages.
If that. There are currently 81 CPAN packages in the 64-bit distro
after Ken added biber's deps, and a few dozen more may be needed to fill
in what was provided by perl_vendor. Even Ports provides "only" 133
CPAN packages to support all the software therein, so it really
shouldn't be that big of a number in all.
>> I hope you know what happens over at debian, macports and redhat with
>> this scheme. Been there, done that.
I'm not sure to what you're referring, Reini, but this can and does work.
>> Also, our UI setup selector cannot handle that.
> It's easy enough to provide bundle packages and the normal user would
> never need to look at the individual distribution packages. They could
> even be hidden if seeing those in the chooser window really is a
We don't need bundles, and we certainly don't want to hide packages from
users. Even a couple hundred packages in their own category should work
>> At cygwin we favor cpan over cygwin packages.
According to whom?
That may work for LFS-type scenarios, but distributions can't say "oh,
BTW, this 'biber' program you want to use needs a few dozen Perl
libraries, go get them yourself from CPAN". Perl modules that are
dependencies of other packages need to be properly packaged for the
distribution to work OOTB.
>> If the urgent need for a local patch arises the user can always cpan
>> it, until the lazy maintainer updates his package.
Patching really isn't so much the problem here; adding new modules, and
keeping things updated is.
More information about the Cygwin-apps