[openbeos] Re: Do we want to recreate SoftwareValet/PackageBuilder?
- From: "Ryan Leavengood" <leavengood@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 20:40:30 -0400
Hey Stephan,
I'm not sure if you meant this to go to the whole list, but nothing
bad was there so oh well ;)
I'll respond to the whole list as well:
DriveSetup is on my list of things to look into. You make a good point
in that we can use the existing SoftwareValet and PackageBuilder for a
while.
Are there documents anywhere regarding DriveSetup and how it would
interact with the new file system architecture? Is all the ground work
done at the low-level? Also what would be the best way to test, using
spare hard-drives (I do have some) or would it be possible to test on
"virtual drives" that exist on a partition? Maybe some of the
techniques used to test the Haiku BFS implementation could be useful
here.
Ryan
On 5/9/06, Stephan Assmus <superstippi@xxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Ryan,
Up front - i'm sorry I have not been helpful at all with the icon editor
yet.
To be perfectly honest, much more important than SV (i think) would be
DriveSetup. The one from R5 cannot be used, since we have a new API for
this stuff. Software Vallet OTOH and PackageBuilder are there and probably
work. I know we cannot ship them with Haiku, i just mean DriveSetup is more
urgent. That being, said, i have suggested to a couple people now that
DriveSetup is a neat project.... though i don't know if anybody really
picked up the idea. :-)
Best regards,
-Stephan
Other related posts:
