Installing a compiler by default

[Peter Garrett]

On Fri, 9 Jun 2006 22:54:32 +0200
Stephan Hermann <sh at sourcecode.de> wrote:

[snipped but not ignored]

> It's not telling the world: Users are idiots, but to give the people the 
> opportunity to do something, which they normally don't need, with open 
> eyes and with the thought, that they're at sometime on their own.

OK Stephan :) Your post makes more sense than most of the arguments put
forward against installing build-essential.

Perhaps I'm giving users more credit for thought than I should - I was
certainly around on IRC when the backports fiasco was in full swing.

Nevertheless - is there evidence that users of distros that include gcc
and friends have more troubles?

Regarding the issue of the packaging sytem not knowing about compiled apps
- I encourage the use of the "checkinstall" tool to get around that to
some degree, although I know it isn't a panacea.

Thought provoking and sensible post - thanks. I still think including
build-essential won't result in a massive increase of problems, but your
case is worthy of consideration.

Sincerely,

Peter



 -- 


"Hyperlinks subvert hierarchy."

-The Cluetrain Manifesto