Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on February 13, 2007 03:46 PM
Autopackage didn't match up to its goals. It suffers from implementation limitations, dumb ideas.
The original project goal was to provide SELF-CONTAINED Windows-like installers for Linux systems. The project however delivered something in between installers and network setup tools. The generated packages DO NEVER contain a complete application, but always come with dependencies and WITHOUT the required libraries. Whereas Windows-installers always contain the application PLUS any required DLL.
That's why Autpackage installers are unsuitable for installation on Internet-connection-less computers. And if I already have a DSL connection (or modem at least) and the more user-friendly distro package manager, then where is the point in using a half baked and not self-contained installer?
Mimicking Windows installers half-way didn't solve anyones problem. I seriously hope this was the last article and news we heard from Autopackage.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
It just doesn't do what it ought to do
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 13, 2007 03:46 PMThe original project goal was to provide SELF-CONTAINED Windows-like installers for Linux systems. The project however delivered something in between installers and network setup tools. The generated packages DO NEVER contain a complete application, but always come with dependencies and WITHOUT the required libraries. Whereas Windows-installers always contain the application PLUS any required DLL.
That's why Autpackage installers are unsuitable for installation on Internet-connection-less computers. And if I already have a DSL connection (or modem at least) and the more user-friendly distro package manager, then where is the point in using a half baked and not self-contained installer?
Mimicking Windows installers half-way didn't solve anyones problem. I seriously hope this was the last article and news we heard from Autopackage.
#