In <1p61ckxidk678.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 12:13:20 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> No More DLL Hell - The Song
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| If you don't know what "DLL Hell" is, you might not understand this
>>| song. If you do know what it is you will probably love it.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.interfacett.com/dllhell/
>>
>> Song and lyrics on page.
>>
>> ...And they say Linux dependency hell still exists while Synaptic and
>> repositories, for example, make it long-forgotten history.
>
> You seem to grossly misunderstand what DLL (and shared library) hell
> is. It has nothing to do with downloading dependancies when installing
> your software, it has to do with conflicting dependancies already
> installed. Synaptic can't solve that.
>
> An example would be one version of a library requires foolibc 2.2.2-
> patch1 while another requires 2.2.2-patch15, and you can't have both
> installed at the same time (you can have multiple major versions, but
> not multiple minor versions). Installing 2.2.2-patch15 breaks app1,
> while app2 won't run with 2.2.2-patch1.
Yes, it's much better to distribute your app as a package as is
generally done for OS X, and sidestep the dependency/DLL-hell issue
altogether.
--
Peter
|
|
