| 1 |
On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 11:59, Brian Webb wrote: |
| 2 |
> For those who may be new to stow, et. al. An alternative to stow that I |
| 3 |
> think has some advantages is the Encap Package Manager: epkg |
| 4 |
> http://www.encap.org/epkg. It's written in C (rather than perl), and it |
| 5 |
> supports more automated versioning. My intent is not to start a "this is |
| 6 |
> better that that" war. Just wanted to give an alternative to those that |
| 7 |
> are new to the concept. ;-) |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Hey, great. I don't like the default behavior of installing the |
| 10 |
"latest" version but it is flexible (you can specify a specific |
| 11 |
version). Encap does something that I wanted --- it can ignore certain |
| 12 |
directories in a package (e.g if a package is "built in place" then |
| 13 |
encap could be asked to ignore the <package>/src directory). It is also |
| 14 |
an advantage to have it written in C so that it can used earlier in a |
| 15 |
system-installation process (perl is no longer in the base install of |
| 16 |
some systems). As far as I can see Encap is compatible with stow and |
| 17 |
one could use either alternately. I'll give Encap a try. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Thanks Brian. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Fuper, Memphis, LPIC-1 |
Archives