Auto Package

Mike Hearn mike at
Tue Mar 29 11:18:54 CST 2005

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 06:14:14 -0800, Daniel Robitaille wrote:

>From the bug:

 ------- Additional Comment #1 From Matt Zimmerman  2005-03-28 18:20 UTC
autopackage is not nearly suitable for Ubuntu's packaging requirements,
and in general there are better ways of solving the problems that it tries
to address, within the Ubuntu packaging system.  Our efforts will be
better spent improving Ubuntu's packaging system than trying to integrate
with autopackage.

Well, that's pretty much the answer I was expecting. I am curious though
how the following problems will be solved:

- Software licensed such that it cannot be repackaged by Ubuntu (eg,

- Software getting rapidly out of date. In Hoary, Inkscape and Gaim
  are already out of date. These aren't minor insignificant apps!

- Software not being packaged at all

etc etc. Basically all the problems that triggered the creation of
autopackage in the first place. 

Saying "there are better ways of solving the problems that it tries to
address" isn't very enlightening I'm afraid. The only way I can see to
avoid the inertia and stagnation that Debian ended up with without
decentralising is by keeping the package repositories small (which is
what main is) or large and sometimes broken, like universe/unstable. And
that has all the problems debated time and time again in many forums.

As polishing tools like Synaptic and friends (which are good at
what they do!) isn't really addressing any of the deeper problems,
I can't agree that your time is better spent improving Ubuntus own
packaging tools. 

thanks -mike

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list