Re: [GD-Linux] ANN: Candy Cruncher for Linux shipped

[Jan E. <ch...@in...>]

On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Mark Collins wrote:

>On Tuesday 26 February 2002 9:22 pm, Ryan C. Gordon wrote:
>> Astonishing.
>>
>> "a slightly more compact install system" is to stick it in a tarball, in
>> which case the complaint will be, "nice download size, but what do I do
>> with this tar.bz2 file?"
>>
>> If I take the graphical installer out, I'll get bitching that there's only
>> a text-based installer. If I take the text-based installer out, I'll get
>> bitching that the graphical one doesn't work with the version of GTK+ on
>> their system.
>>
>> Why don't people complain that there isn't a unified way to do ANYTHING in
>> Linux instead? That would solve the problem much better...we could remove
>> half of SDL's code, and 75% of the installer system.
>
>If it was a 10MB downoad, and only 1MB of the total download was used by the 
>installer, then it wouldn't be a problem, but that's not the case. A third of 
>the total downoad isn't required to run the game, that's the problem. 

Quit whining. Is it such a big deal? I assume you downloaded the package
in 30 seconds anyway? What does a few seconds/minutes more matter? 

Nobody whines about downloading some 150Mb test version of Wolfenstein or
similar Windows games...

>Better options for distrobution of such a small package would be RPMs (and 
>debs).

Debs are horrible to create.

>Some people are still on a system that limits the total amount of data they 
>can download (many Universities, for example, have IP quotas)...

I assume that if you can't download 1 extra Mb on your university, you
shouldn't be downloading a game at all, but instead save the precious
bandwidth for study-related stuff...

-- 
  And it came to pass that in time the Great God Om spake unto Brutha,
    the Chosen One: "Psst!"
                                        -- Terry Pratchett, Small Gods