Joined: July 2004
||Posted: June 30 2007,15:50
Before reading this, please be aware that I'm not saying this is a bad idea, but simply that there are better alternatives, in my opinion.
|DSL is great but has a drawback : it s a modified debian. Some debian package won't install through apt-get because DSL has not the proper debian dependency structure. This make compile stuff for DSL a real problem. There are often missing libs you can't add because of dependencies issues. |
I don't consider the inability to install debian packages a drawback, but I guess that's a matter of opinion. Compiling software, however, has little to do with your package management system, and depending on libs that are provided by such a method is actually less reliable, when compiling new software, than having no package management at all.
I used to disagree with this when others told me the same thing, because I hadn't had any trouble. Over the years, though, I saw increasing problems with mixing a binary package manager with source on the same system, and today I try to avoid package managers as much as possible.
The "missing libs you can't add" problem is an inadequacy of package management (and by the fact that DSL is increasingly incompatible with Debian). These libs are intended to be used with binary programs obtained from the same repositories as the libs, and not necessarily sufficient for compiling programs. You can compile the necessary libraries you need if binary versions are incompatible with your desired application.
Relying on another distribution, such as Debian proper, for compiling applications for DSL will probably work ok in most cases, but anytime you do this you run the risk of building programs that are incompatible with DSL if your build system does not have the same or similar versions of libs and headers that were used to build the fundamental parts of DSL. I used to build myDSL packages on an old Suse box, and most worked ok in DSL. However, newer distributions have newer libs and headers (and kernels), many of which create binaries that don't work in DSL without having to include redundant libraries. Because of this, it's my belief that using DSL itself to compile programs intended for DSL is usually going to be more reliable than using Debian.