Some installers will already do this, such as the Yast2 installer. It goes into it's database and check dependencies, an d attempts to install the proper libraries. Another option would be for the installer to search the internet, eh? I have seen a few M$ installers do that. The differences in libraries that I have seen, are primarily with older apps. Jonathan

-----Original Message----- From: Nick LeRoy [mailto:nleroy@cs.wisc.edu] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 2:04 PM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Microsoft Vs. Linux Desktop Battle Heats Up

...

On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 01:40:21PM -0500, Jonathan Shilling wrote:

...

Actually, I agree with the thought of using a separate

...

...

libraries, but it should only be necessary when the need

...

...

be found on the system that you are loading on.

This is what OSX apps can do. If there is anything app-specific, it goes into the app directory. And to OSX, an "application" isn't an executable, but actually that directory, Application.app.

I know that my copy of Applixware 5.0 does this: when installing, it checks for correct versions of libraries. If they are not there, I am given the option of opdating my system or of installing those

...

with Applixware. Because of this, I have a software package that I originally put on RedHat in 2000 and just last month installed on SuSE 8.2 and it works still.

...

You are probably correct in the cause of dll-hell, however if the libraries were more standardized it might help as well.

I don't understand what you mean. libgtk is built from the same source whether it's on RHL, Mandrake, Debian, or SuSE. I don't

On Tuesday 10 June 2003 1:53 pm, Michael George wrote: directory for the library cannot libraries for use only pretend to know

...

everything about linux, though, so perhaps I will learn something from your troubles.

After reflecting on it a bit more, I want more than just this, too...

Let's say that I'm installing application "foo" (I just love that name), and it needs lib "bar" which is currently not installed.

I Boldly Assert(tm) that the "foo" installer should:

1. Consult RPM or whatever package manager is installed, and tell it "I'm looking for libbar.so version 1.2.3 . Please install it if you can".

1a. RPM then checks its database of things that came with the distro, and says, "yep I have it, and I just installed it for you" (during which time it'll have prompted the user to insert CD 3, etc.). 1b. RPM checks it's database and says "I don't know about libbar.so".

2. The application installer then installs libbar.so on it's own in /opt/bar...

Question: Does RPM store the CD directory some place? I don't know.

Thoughts? Flames?

-Nick

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com