gEDA-user: Fedora Core 5 installation notes

[Mark Rages]

On 7/29/06, Stuart Brorson <sdb at cloud9.net> wrote:
>
> Fair enough.  It can be brittle.  But I am continually trying to
> robustify it.  It's just difficult since the distros are always
> moving, the gEDA developers are always sticking new dependencies into
> their stuff, the GNU/FSF/Gtk/other developers are constantly modifying
> their stuff, and there's a new distro coming out every few months.

Well, it's been a while since I tried it, so my criticism may be out of date.

> >
> > Like I said above, the proper means of distribution would be a
> > repository rather than an .iso. Wojciech Kazubski almost has
> > everything together.  I will email him again about this.
>
> That's fine.  But what about SuSE, Debian, and the others?

Actually, an xml-metadata repository will work with YaST, up2date, and
yum.  See http://linux.duke.edu/projects/metadata/. Debian folks still
need their own format.

>
> In any event, I'm not meaning to argue.  Personally, I'd rather see a
> situation where we have an RPM-based install (CD or otherwise) of the
> whole Suite, a SuSE- specific install of the whole thing, a Debian
> install, and so on.  The could all happily live on teh gEDA install
> web page along with my installer.  Or if we got installers for all the
> major distros on the gEDA download webpage, my CD could just retire
> and go away!

It would be nice to have all that, wouldn't it. Distribution
maintenance is hard work.

Regards,
Mark
markrages at gmail
-- 
You think that it is a secret, but it never has been one.
  - fortune cookie