I'd say it's relevant for Koha deployers, but I'll email you. :-)<div><br></div><div>--Mizst<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Chris Cormack <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:chris@bigballofwax.co.nz">chris@bigballofwax.co.nz</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">On 30 April 2011 11:47, Mizst Audens <<a href="mailto:mizstik@gmail.com">mizstik@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I don't know about Debian, but I've had more than my fair share of problems<br>
> with packages from Ubuntu repo, and usually a compile from upstream source<br>
> fixes the problems. I remember a case with php5-gd where Debian refuses to<br>
> update their repo to the new version, causing widespread problems for any<br>
> php app relying on image scaling. For a while, the only way to fix it was to<br>
> compile from upstream source. So you see where I'm coming from.<br>
> But besides that, an immediately visible benefit is that you don't have to<br>
> go hunt for package names in repos if you use cpan. You can just grab the<br>
> name that's given by the dependency checker.<br>
> --Mizst<br>
<br>
</div>Way off topic for the koha list now, so if you want to continue<br>
discussing why you think using packages is worse than compiling from<br>
source, feel free to email me off list. (I do have counterpoints for<br>
everything you just mentioned :))<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Chris<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br></div>