Packaging idea (Re: What next?)

[Jeff Spaleta]

On 6/2/05, Konstantin Ryabitsev <mricon at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, I cannot deny that the last 2 weeks spent packaging nonfree
> software has greatly influenced this post. :) That, plus the sad fact
> that even though several vendors provide .rpm files, they are utterly
> unusable because they try to be installable on as many things as
> possible, and always end up sucking on all.

so basically the fap layer is only really a target for nonfree
software... but clearly
its doomed to fail because the pre-existing conditions for it to be
used successfully are not going to be met

if proprietary vendors can't package rpms correctly.. the fap layer
doesn't help.
if proprietary vendors can't create repos correctly.. the fap layer
doesn't help.

I have very little faith in proprietary vendors doing either correctly.

-jef