The Following User Says Thank You to wjg For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2009-05-02
, 13:05
|
Posts: 1,101 |
Thanked: 1,185 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Spain
|
#2
|
![]() |
2010-06-28
, 14:54
|
Posts: 6 |
Thanked: 2 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#3
|
![]() |
2012-07-23
, 22:31
|
|
Posts: 1,348 |
Thanked: 1,863 times |
Joined on Jan 2009
@ fr/35/rennes
|
#4
|
The Following User Says Thank You to www.rzr.online.fr For This Useful Post: | ||
I originally wanted to do this properly as .deb packages, but found it too cumbersome: encfs uses two small parts of libboost, which is quite a large beast all by itself, librlog, and fuse - all of different origins - and requires the fuse kernel module. In my understanding these would all have to be done as separate packages resulting in 5 separate packages - fuse kernel module, fuse-utils, librlog, libboost, encfs - just to provide a single usable functionality.
I've therefore chosen to create a single compressed tar archive that needs to be untarred as root in '/' and wrapped the setup code in a shell procedure named runencfs.
I've created this stuff mostly because I wanted a better way to safely store data on my n810 - so "your mileage may vary" and "caveat user".
What are your general feelings on providing useful functionality outside of the packaging environment? Is this a no-go for you? Would you rather not have some functionality than having it this "amateurish" way?