[Mentalunix-developers] Re: mpkg package database stuff

[Dustin K. <nul...@ya...>]

Sounds good,  cant think of any real downfalls. 
Although, by doing this, we are basically requiring
the use of a database on  a system, and could be
somewhat limiting.  As for the plain text/flat db, we
should keep the layout of the system uniform, and have
it be xml based.  Or for that matter, we could create
a small,  versatile xml based database. or something
like that in case mysql or postgresql aren't available
or wanted.  Also, by requiring an external db means
that the db needs to be installed and configured
before mpkg can use it.  The alternative to requiring
the external db upon mpkg install would be using the
generic flat db, and making a db exporter that would
be able to export one db into another.


Dustin

---
men...@li...
wrote:
> Send Mentalunix-developers mailing list submissions
> to
> 	men...@li...
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
> visit
> 
>
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mentalunix-developers
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
> 	men...@li...
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	men...@li...
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
> is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Mentalunix-developers
> digest..."
> 
> 
> ---- METNALUNIX DEVELOPER'S MAILING LIST DIGEST
> ------
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. mpkg package database stuff (Clinton Ebadi)
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 1
> From: "Clinton Ebadi" <men...@cr...>
> To: men...@li...
> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:26:48 -0500
> Subject: [Mentalunix-developers] mpkg package
> database stuff
> Reply-To:
> men...@li...
> 
> I had a bit of an idea at school today about mpkg's
> package database -
> - why go through all the work of setting up our own
> package database, 
> when we could use an abstract interface to any
> number of db's. Let me 
> explain.
> 
> Ok, step one would be to write a library with
> database access methods 
> for mpkg. Example: find_file(), find_pkg(), etc,
> that would be used 
> when installing or finding packages to install(so
> the package manager 
> would be able to find existing packages, available
> packages, and see 
> what packages provide the files the package you are
> installing's 
> dependencies,etc). Now, why write an entire database
> when all we need 
> are these functions to access the database?
> 
> There are many free SQL databases(postgre,mySQL,etc)
> that can be 
> searched and have fields added too, so why not use
> them? My idea is 
> to put all the functions headers in a header file,
> and then make the 
> implementation a nice shared object -- just pop in
> whatever interface 
> you wanted. The first of these would be a SQL
> interface(postgre or 
> mySQL?). The functions would just wrap around the
> sql server 
> interfaces, providing a standard method to access
> the package 
> database. The eliminates are a large amount of work
> on out part, and 
> also adds flexibility. Don't want to have your pkg
> database in a SQL 
> server? Fine, use a flat text interface. Don't like
> that? Then use 
> any number of interfaces to different package
> database access 
> methods. See how this is a good thing?
> 
> Implementing our own db format for the package
> database would be 
> pointless and just add more work to the task of
> writing mpkg. So, 
> does my abstract interface seem to make sense?
> 
> -------------------------------
> #indrema @ irc.openprojects.net
> be a part of the revolution.
>    unknown_lamer
> 
> 
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mentalunix-developers mailing list
> Men...@li...
>
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mentalunix-developers
> 
> 
> End of Mentalunix-developers Diges


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/