Linux Personal Package Archive

[TerryL]

I've been reading about PPA's as another install method for Linux OpenXTalk Lite, which uses the terminal with three command lines. It seems a PPA must be made using each Linux distro desired, and a new PPA made when that distro and OpenXTalk Lite release new versions. That's a lot of maintenance. I don't think it's worth the continual effort. Any informed opinions?
https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA

[tperry2x]

A PPA is useful if we were to get OXT into a mainstream package archive, so it shows up in a Linux package manager - but you are right, just maintaining that is a full time task.

My thought is that it may not be worthwhile, at least while we have assorted windowing bugs to work out for some Linux distros. But that's just my opinion.

[OpenXTalkPaul]

I think it would be good to have something like our own PPA repository, not just for OXT builds, but also for any add-ons, or patches, or related content like demo stacks. I've mention this a bunch that I think OXT needs its own package manager and package repo, and also have it be a package system where people can host their own public or private repos (like PPAs) but for OXT.

How about builds of emulators like 'Sheepshaver' macOS 8.6-9 emulator, or 'Previous' NeXT emulator that can be used to run Retro-xTalks too?

I've been looking at Debian's .deb packaging (useful for Jailbroken iPads ), and that seems fairly simple to make a deb archive that can be installed like you would on a Unix-like OS with dpkg or apt-get.

[tperry2x]

I think it would be good to have something like our own PPA repository, not just for OXT builds, but also for any add-ons, or patches, or related content like demo stacks....

Having a public PPA (or at least maintaining one to be compatible, and signed for various distros, is a lot of work). Keeping it current so it can be added via a package manager can be a full time task.

...I've mention this a bunch that I think OXT needs its own package manager and package repo, and also have it be a package system where people can host their own public or private repos (like PPAs) but for OXT.

As we spoke about previously, this could essentially be a stack that pulls content from a pre-specified location. Like what revOnline used to do. It would be better if we had our own (fresh) domain, dedicated hosting and storage for this (which isn't where this forum is now) - and can pull the packages from there from within OXT.
The other thing is, I'd want any downloads/addons to be verified by us (me/you/anyone willing to do that regularly) - to check that anything added is okay. Not only from a security standpoint, but also from a user-experience point of view. If anyone can submit anything to an OXT repository - even if it's something as small as an offensive comment inside script, that could reflect badly on OXT. I'd want it all to be vetted and someone to go over any submissions first.

How about builds of emulators like 'Sheepshaver' macOS 8.6-9 emulator, or 'Previous' NeXT emulator that can be used to run Retro-xTalks too?

Is there anything open-source that runs in MacOS 8.6 > MacOS 9, which can be modified to look or behave anything like OXT does? The closest I can get is my Retro OXT Lite build - which runs in OSX 10.6.8 > MacOS 10.14 (but I haven't done much more work on that for a long time because things need reinventing due to the engine processing functions differently, and not having certain functions that LCC 9.x (and therefore OXT) relies on.

I've been looking at Debian's .deb packaging (useful for Jailbroken iPads ), and that seems fairly simple to make a deb archive that can be installed like you would on a Unix-like OS with dpkg or apt-get.

Yes, that's fairly easy - but again - where do you host it, how do you keep it maintained and are there really that many people who are going to use it? I mean - yes, it's all very clever that you can get sheepshaver running on a jailbroken iPad - but then equally, you can just pick up an old laptop and install a lightweight version of linux on there - and then have the most recent version of OXT, rather than recreating something legacy from the ground up. Not being funny, but that seems an easier approach to me.

[richmond62]

Is there anything open-source that runs in MacOS 8.6 > MacOS 9, which can be modified to look or behave anything like OXT does?

I think that is unlikely.

RunRev "came of age" just as MacOS X arrived, and only very early, commercial versions ran on MacOS 9.

[tperry2x]

Is there anything open-source that runs in MacOS 8.6 > MacOS 9, which can be modified to look or behave anything like OXT does?

I think that is unlikely.
RunRev "came of age" just as MacOS X arrived, and only very early, commercial versions ran on MacOS 9.

Yes, that was kind of a rhetorical question. Although if there IS something that exists, and is open source which we can modify, then I'm instantly interested. (I'd rather develop that for the Mac than deal with problems in the latest MacOS ).