DebForMeeGo

(→Why Switch MeeGo To DEB (switching Moblin to DEB))
(wikify slightly, categorize)
 
(4 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
== Scope ==
== Scope ==
The aim is at least to keep the *.deb package format in the MeeGo distributions aiming at Nokia Phones/ Handhelds.
The aim is at least to keep the *.deb package format in the MeeGo distributions aiming at Nokia Phones/ Handhelds.
-
Although using the .deb format throughout the MeeGo project is desireable, not all arguments here apply to the same extent looking at the whole project.
+
Although using the .deb format throughout the MeeGo project is desirable, not all arguments here apply to the same extent looking at the whole project.
== Why Switch MeeGo To DEB (switching Moblin to DEB) ==
== Why Switch MeeGo To DEB (switching Moblin to DEB) ==
Line 13: Line 13:
* DEB has wider adoptation than RPM [2]
* DEB has wider adoptation than RPM [2]
* not to throw away experience gained with maemo which is reflected in the packaging
* not to throw away experience gained with maemo which is reflected in the packaging
 +
* better package management and error correction with DEB tools. (dpkg, apt-get, aptitude, deborphan, debsums, the base DEB framework including pre/post scripts, conflict resolution, dependency management and such)
[1] amount of third party applications [http://garage.moblin.org/ here] and [http://maemo.org/downloads/Maemo5/ here]. Also note that a Maemo5 port often involves UI changes, which make it more work.
[1] amount of third party applications [http://garage.moblin.org/ here] and [http://maemo.org/downloads/Maemo5/ here]. Also note that a Maemo5 port often involves UI changes, which make it more work.
 +
[2] comparing numbers from [http://distrowatch.com/ distrowatch] (Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/etc + Debian against OpenSUSE + Fedora + RedHat + Mandriva)
[2] comparing numbers from [http://distrowatch.com/ distrowatch] (Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/etc + Debian against OpenSUSE + Fedora + RedHat + Mandriva)
Line 23: Line 25:
== Common Advantages of DEB and RPM ==
== Common Advantages of DEB and RPM ==
* Tools for verifying (e.g. lintian and rpmlink) are available and can be used to check for a package quality.
* Tools for verifying (e.g. lintian and rpmlink) are available and can be used to check for a package quality.
-
* both RPM and DEB are LSB compilant as ''technically there is no dictated package format, only that [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Standard_Base#Choice_of_RPM_package_format RPM must be supported when installing]''
+
* both RPM and DEB are LSB compilant as ''technically there is no dictated package format, only that [[:wikipedia:Linux_Standard_Base#Choice_of_RPM_package_format|RPM must be supported when installing]]''
== Alternative Solution ==
== Alternative Solution ==
* Keep a Debian base system, and provide third-party applications in an LSB package formet (which is RPM inside). LSB-compliant RPM should install flawlessly, and that way the frontier between system packages (DEB) and third-party applications (RPM) is well defined.
* Keep a Debian base system, and provide third-party applications in an LSB package formet (which is RPM inside). LSB-compliant RPM should install flawlessly, and that way the frontier between system packages (DEB) and third-party applications (RPM) is well defined.
* Add the imaging feature to the Deb package.
* Add the imaging feature to the Deb package.
 +
* The [[Maemo on Debian]] project does not try to convince the official MeeGo to use some upstream but instead works on a distribution which integrates existing Maemo5 and future MeeGo components into a standard Debian distribution.
 +
 +
[[Category:Packaging]]

Latest revision as of 13:39, 6 May 2010

This page collects all arguments for and against keeping the *.deb package format in MeeGo.

If you want to voice your opinion on this Idea, you can vote at Brainstorm.

Contents

[edit] Scope

The aim is at least to keep the *.deb package format in the MeeGo distributions aiming at Nokia Phones/ Handhelds. Although using the .deb format throughout the MeeGo project is desirable, not all arguments here apply to the same extent looking at the whole project.

[edit] Why Switch MeeGo To DEB (switching Moblin to DEB)

  • No porting for Maemo packages needed
  • Maemo has the bigger community [1]
  • allows syncing from Debian/ Ubuntu
  • DEB has wider adoptation than RPM [2]
  • not to throw away experience gained with maemo which is reflected in the packaging
  • better package management and error correction with DEB tools. (dpkg, apt-get, aptitude, deborphan, debsums, the base DEB framework including pre/post scripts, conflict resolution, dependency management and such)

[1] amount of third party applications here and here. Also note that a Maemo5 port often involves UI changes, which make it more work.

[2] comparing numbers from distrowatch (Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/etc + Debian against OpenSUSE + Fedora + RedHat + Mandriva)

[edit] Why Keep MeeGo As RPM (switching Maemo to RPM)

  • No porting for Moblin packages needed
  • Moblin build infrastructure has more capabilities already in place, such as imaging.

[edit] Common Advantages of DEB and RPM

  • Tools for verifying (e.g. lintian and rpmlink) are available and can be used to check for a package quality.
  • both RPM and DEB are LSB compilant as technically there is no dictated package format, only that RPM must be supported when installing

[edit] Alternative Solution

  • Keep a Debian base system, and provide third-party applications in an LSB package formet (which is RPM inside). LSB-compliant RPM should install flawlessly, and that way the frontier between system packages (DEB) and third-party applications (RPM) is well defined.
  • Add the imaging feature to the Deb package.
  • The Maemo on Debian project does not try to convince the official MeeGo to use some upstream but instead works on a distribution which integrates existing Maemo5 and future MeeGo components into a standard Debian distribution.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.maemo.org/DebForMeeGo"