<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Duh! Oh you are quite right. I even use boinc manager daily from a
desktop machine to check on the 'headless' machines elsewhere on the
LAN.<br>
I have as of yet to come across usage of the manager w/o client also
installed on same machine though. My son's gentoo machines run
boinc-client only (no gui). I check on them with boinc-manager from
WinXP or Xubuntu machine.<br>
<br>
Unencumbered by any actual knowledge... I like the metapackage idea.
Anybody doing anything "out of the norm" is likely to understand the
differences and be able to pick the packages desired. Applying the
KISS principle, Joe User could
just install the metapackage. <br>
<br>
Taking that thought a bit further... when running 64b Ubuntu/Xubuntu OS
and 64b BOINC, several projects <b>require </b>the packages
"ia32-libs" and / or
"libstdc++5" in order to run their applications. Is there anyway to
cover this
as a 'for some projects recommended packages if running 64b"? Can
recommended packages text be 'forked' / variable depending on 32b or
64b?<br>
<br>
Thanx, Skip<br>
......................... tear here ........................<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:pkg-boinc-devel-request@lists.alioth.debian.org">pkg-boinc-devel-request@lists.alioth.debian.org</a>
wrote:
<pre wrap="">Message: 5
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 09:41:26 +0200
From: "Frank S. Thomas" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:fst@debian.org"><fst@debian.org></a>
Subject: Re: Boinc-client / manager relationship
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:pkg-boinc-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org">pkg-boinc-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org</a>
Message-ID: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:200805160941.33368.fst@debian.org"><200805160941.33368.fst@debian.org></a>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Thursday 15 May 2008 18:17, Skip Guenter wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite" style="font-style: italic;">
<pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>boinc-manager requires boinc-client
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>boinc-client does not REQUIRE boinc-manager
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Strictly speaking boinc-manager also does not require boinc-client because it
can be used to monitor remote clients. But I think this situation is much
less common than having boinc-client without boinc-manager installed (think
of servers without X). I think this relationship is adequately expressed in
boinc-client's/boinc-manager's Recommends/Suggests fields:
Package: boinc-client
Suggests: boinc-manager
Package: boinc-manager
Recommends: boinc-client
However it seems that people still have problems to install a "standard BOINC
installation" (client + manager). What can we do to improve the situation?
Maybe the package descriptions should be improved. Or we could introduce a
boinc metapackage which depends on boinc-client and boinc-manager.
Other suggestions?
Cheers,
<div class="moz-txt-sig">--
Frank S. Thomas <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:fst@debian.org"><fst@debian.org></a> PGP public key ID: 0xDC426429
Debian Developer finger <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fst/key@db.debian.org">fst/key@db.debian.org</a></div></pre>
</body>
</html>