Re: Comparing PackageFS and GNU PM

[Richard Stallman]

    AVAILABLE entry example:  emacs21/info .
    info is a "fake file" which returns package metadata if read.

    Then you can:
    - Install a file with "cp -a AVAILABLE/emacs21 INSTALL/"

It looks like this cp command just puts the emacs21/info file into
INSTALL.  But

    - Show files installed by a package with "ls -R INSTALL/emacs21"

Here it seems like INSTALL/emacs21 would contain all the files
that Emacs installs anywhere.

Where would these files come from?  Where would PackageFS find them,
and how would it know where to find them?

    6) In PackageFS, installation is accomplished through  _only_one_ operation 
    (it may be cp, mkdir or drag&drop). In GNU PM you firstly need to extract
    package and then to create symlink. This is an important point to be 
evaluated
    if you want to provide usability to all users.

This is a feature.  You untar a package, then you use the symlink (or
absence of one) to control whether it is installed or not.  I don't
think it will be hard to understand.  We can set up a GUI to make
it more convenient.

But /package is not limited to symlinks.  You can, if you wish, untar
the package directly under /package.  Then it is installed immediately
by virtue of being there.

So you get both alternatives.

    1) PackageFS relies on existing package managers... currently they
    work quite well, and maybe it would be better to improve them than
    building a new one from scratch.

I don't understand that part.