Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Thu 31 Jul 2014, 03:28
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Misc
Is it better to include dependencies or not?
Moderators: Flash, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 2 [16 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Author Message
battleshooter


Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 1065
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Thu 28 Jun 2012, 17:30    Post subject:  Is it better to include dependencies or not?  

Every time I put together a particularly large package with a lot of dependencies, like KDE4 or Cinelerra, I'm torn between creating them as one large package with dependencies included, or separately so the user doesn't have to double up if they already have different versions of the same dependency installed.

The way I see it is,

Dependencies included:
    -Convenience, one click install
    -The dependencies included are known to work


Dependencies packaged separately:
    -Minimizes risk of clashing with user's preinstalled dependencies
    -Less for the user to download


What's everyone else's opinions on this? Is it better to include all dependencies together or separately? Or is there a middle ground solution that would also work?

_________________
LMMS 1.0.2, Ardour 3.5.389, Kdenlive 0.9.8
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Flash
Official Dog Handler


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 10948
Location: Arizona USA

PostPosted: Thu 28 Jun 2012, 21:28    Post subject:  

Definitely include the dependencies, unless they make the final result huge. Memory is cheap enough, and clock speeds so fast, that it no longer makes any sense to try to save a few megs.

It's a productivity thing. Better a few megs that just work when you click on it than 10K that requires days of searching and trying to get it to work.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Lobster
Official Crustacean


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 15117
Location: Paradox Realm

PostPosted: Thu 28 Jun 2012, 23:53    Post subject:  

I agree with Flash.

Operating System base programs = small, efficient, code re-use
Added software = convenient for end users.

For example Openshot needs Python and ideally Blender.
Do I want to install devx or look for the latest Python and then go Blender hunting? Clue = no!
So I prefer an SFS if I can find it . . .

The trick is to use your own experience.
Imagine using an 'efficient' mobile smart phone that asked you about installing 'dependencies' . . . Rolling Eyes

Hope that is realistic and pragmatic Smile

_________________
Puppy WIKI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
aarf

Joined: 30 Aug 2007
Posts: 3620
Location: around the bend

PostPosted: Fri 29 Jun 2012, 00:30    Post subject:  

Îf it is a really big pet package I would use a new pupsave so all dependancies would be prefered.
It it were a sfs package I would test it with my current pupsave if there were clashes I would do a pfix=ram . So perhaps split the sfs into logical stand alone seperate sfs and note what is needed to run it somewhere. If it is big it should be a sfs not pet so I go for stand alone split sfs and seperate big pet so then the user can choose what suits their needs.

_________________

ASUS EeePC Flare series 1025C 4x Intel Atom N2800 @ 1.86GHz RAM 2063MB 800x600p ATA 320G
_-¤-_

<º))))><.¸¸.•´¯`•.#.•´¯`•.¸¸. ><((((º>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
battleshooter


Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 1065
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Fri 29 Jun 2012, 05:11    Post subject:  

Thanks for all the responses guys!

Hmmm, interesting. I'm surprised all the comments were for packaging dependencies together.

The thing is I usually package quite larger applications so adding dependencies or not can be a difference of 200mb and make up more than half the package.

A large example would be Kdenlive and Amarok2. They both use KDE-Support, KDE-libs, and QT4. To make things simple and encourage people to use Kdenlive, I'd like to make it a one click install package, but then if I packaged Amarok the same way, I would be doubling dependencies in a massive way.

I suppose though in that case it would be better to separate the KDE dependencies and then package Amarok and Kdenlive separately. I suppose as Lobster says it comes down to experience and what seems best to the packager. I guess I was hoping for with this thread was some alternate suggestions besides my own thoughts on the issue, but the feedback so far has been helpful in clarifying my own thoughts. Smile

_________________
LMMS 1.0.2, Ardour 3.5.389, Kdenlive 0.9.8
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
pemasu


Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Posts: 5463
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Fri 29 Jun 2012, 05:46    Post subject:  

If you have upgraded the libs by your own compile, include them definitively to the build.
About duplicating, yeah, difficult thing. You could try to create generic KDE pet/sfs, QT pet/sfs, dependent libs somehow as they are needed for those apps. And so on...

I think that creating dependencies to the pet.specs for your apps would be huge effort.

If people are afraid of libs overwriting, then the sfs is just fine for them. Sfs loading does not overwrite existing stuff, so previously installed libs and so on will be preserved.

I have created gstreamer-and-dependent-libs pet and vlc-deps-pet for vlc but I have packaged qt separately.
In pet.specs there is for vlc: +qt+vlc-deps-dpup

Yeah it helps when you have own puppy-exprimo repo. PPM reads that and installs the dependencies automatically when you check the dependencies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
01micko


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Posts: 7785
Location: qld

PostPosted: Fri 29 Jun 2012, 06:28    Post subject:  

There's one solution which I have used, mainly because some later libs may be the same as installed libs and overwrite them. You can install libs to a non standard path, then write a wrapper script to kick off the main app including the new path in the LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Works for sfs or pet. Remember, in an sfs the layer is lower than the save layer so a user may be very confused why an app don't work, in fact an old lib may be hiding the intended lib for the program.

I am of the opinion an sfs is better for "one size fits all" and you can include as many deps as you like. With pets,on the other hand, there is always the risk that if a user uninstalls the app the libs come with it, possibly damaging the system.

It's an area to tread carefully. Smile

_________________
Woof Mailing List | keep the faith Cool |
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Lobster
Official Crustacean


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 15117
Location: Paradox Realm

PostPosted: Fri 29 Jun 2012, 07:23    Post subject:  

Now that some smarter dogs have taken an interest in this thread . . .
Is there any mileage in a pet3 (or appet format) or in fact is the current SFS more than sufficient?

I will mention again that I think we will have to accommodate Android App compatibility in the future . . .

Posting this from Raspberry Pi SAP Alpha1 using Chromium incidentally Smile

_________________
Puppy WIKI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
aarf

Joined: 30 Aug 2007
Posts: 3620
Location: around the bend

PostPosted: Fri 29 Jun 2012, 19:32    Post subject:  


_________________

ASUS EeePC Flare series 1025C 4x Intel Atom N2800 @ 1.86GHz RAM 2063MB 800x600p ATA 320G
_-¤-_

<º))))><.¸¸.•´¯`•.#.•´¯`•.¸¸. ><((((º>

Last edited by aarf on Wed 29 Aug 2012, 04:09; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
scsijon

Joined: 23 May 2007
Posts: 1024
Location: the australian mallee

PostPosted: Sat 30 Jun 2012, 22:25    Post subject:  

I wonder if some of the 'extra smarties' we DO have in our puppy world, could get together and write a new Applet-format Shell for Puppy, so that we could use apps from Android, Rasberry, and the like directly in Puppy. ?No, you would still have to compile them for the platform, but not also re-write them for the differances, I think.

Now that would be a blast!

Apologies to Battleshooter for continuing the OP'ing of his thread, but I think maybe this is worth persuing and should have it's own thread, ?maybe under Cutting Edge, what do others think? Who, would be available to lead? I wonder if J-M would be interested in the concept?

_________________
Puppy T290 - BarryK's Racy but with T2 Version 9.0 is under development.
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=94575
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
aarf

Joined: 30 Aug 2007
Posts: 3620
Location: around the bend

PostPosted: Sun 01 Jul 2012, 01:22    Post subject:  


_________________

ASUS EeePC Flare series 1025C 4x Intel Atom N2800 @ 1.86GHz RAM 2063MB 800x600p ATA 320G
_-¤-_

<º))))><.¸¸.•´¯`•.#.•´¯`•.¸¸. ><((((º>

Last edited by aarf on Wed 29 Aug 2012, 04:11; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
battleshooter


Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 1065
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Sun 01 Jul 2012, 20:15    Post subject:  

scsijon wrote:

Apologies to Battleshooter for continuing the OP'ing of his thread


That's alright, I think this thread has served its purpose and put out a few different packaging ideas.

@pemasu

Yeah, creating separate SFSs for major dependency groups is probably what I'll end up doing. The only thing I don't like about SFSs is people with full installs don't know what to do with them most of the time Confused I guess I'll have to start teaching people how to use SFS grabber every time I post an SFS.

@01micko

That's an interesting solution Micko, using a wrapper script, haven't thought of that before. I suppose though it could become a waste in the end to have Amarok and Kdenlive both with their own KDE libs running from their own folder, but I see what you mean and a wrapper solution could definitely come in handy for different circumstances.

_________________
LMMS 1.0.2, Ardour 3.5.389, Kdenlive 0.9.8
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Lobster
Official Crustacean


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 15117
Location: Paradox Realm

PostPosted: Sun 01 Jul 2012, 21:09    Post subject:  

scsijon wrote:

Apologies to Battleshooter for continuing the OP'ing of his thread, but I think maybe this is worth persuing and should have it's own thread, ?maybe under Cutting Edge, what do others think?


Pet2 / Android app compatibility thread in cutting edge
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=632515#632515

Smile

_________________
Puppy WIKI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Flash
Official Dog Handler


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 10948
Location: Arizona USA

PostPosted: Mon 02 Jul 2012, 08:38    Post subject:  

See here for CDE, a possible solution to dependency hell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Jasper


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 1089
Location: England

PostPosted: Mon 02 Jul 2012, 09:37    Post subject:  

Hi Flash et al,

CDE seems really interesting, but after listening to two of the talks by the developer, he says it will usually run quite slowly and needs a target computer made in the last 5 years or so.

It seems it is intended to run specific programs/scripts (which can be amended) from any Linux OS rather than general applications (e.g. LibreOffice)?

I wonder, as a test, could something very small from say, Wary Puppy run on
the RaspberryPi? Or perhaps something from Racy or Knoppix run on Slacko?

My regards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 2 [16 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Misc
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0821s ][ Queries: 11 (0.0034s) ][ GZIP on ]