On Aug 02 2004, David Schleef wrote: > (btw, I think a Darwin port would be cool. I'm tired of fixing > Fink's brokenness.)
I agree. Using Fink is a royal pain in the ass when you already know how Debian works. There are many problems with Fink, IMO. First of all, you have all those packages that are not readily compiled. This means that you have to have a toolchain installed in each computer you intend to use, which is not only a nuisance, but also takes a lot of disk space that could be saved if they were not required. Second, and connected to the first point, depending on the programs you need to use (let's, say, something for end-users like pieces from KDE, which are written in C++), having to compile them can be quite an effort, especially if your computer is slow or has limited RAM available. :-( And, after all, you'd expect the maintainers of the packages to at least compile once the software they maintain and upload to the Fink repository. Third, you don't have goodies like Debian's menu infra-structure employed, which is a problem when you try to teach users that although some programs are listed in the menu of his window manager, the program is not actually there. The same applies to programs that are installed but not accessible without going to the command line. Fourth, they don't keep changelogs of what they do, at least at the last time I checked. Unfortunately, the packages don't really seem to have the equivalents of changelog.Debian.gz which is seriously missed. :-( Spoiled both by Debian and MacOS X, Rogério. -- Learn to quote e-mails decently at: http://pub.tsn.dk/how-to-quote.php http://learn.to/quote
