Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Handling relocatable packages

[Nik C. <ni...@no...>]

On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 10:08:42AM +0000, Laszlo Kovacs wrote:
> Nik Clayton wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 02:48:25PM +0000, Laszlo Kovacs wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > > There should be no such thing as a non-relocatable package.
> > >
> > > I guess what we are trying to do is to create support for both
> > > relocatable and non-relocatable packages. It is up to the developer and
> > > the packager to decide if and how they want to use this support.
> > 
> > There should be no such thing as a non-relocatable package.
> > 
> Are you saying that we shouldn't offer the choice I outlined above and
> we should force people to build fully relocatable packages (the
> documentation part at least) even if they don't want to?

Yes.

The idea of being told "You can only install this document on your
system if you install it _here_" is completely bizarre to me.

N
-- 
Internet connection, $19.95 a month.  Computer, $799.95.  Modem, $149.95.
Telephone line, $24.95 a month.  Software, free.  USENET transmission,
hundreds if not thousands of dollars.  Thinking before posting, priceless.
Somethings in life you can't buy.  For everything else, there's MasterCard.
  -- Graham Reed, in the Scary Devil Monastery