Slackware TGZ to Arch Linux Package Converter

Question

I have two programs that interest me (LilyPond and Battle for Wesnoth) that don't have Arch Linux packages and compiling them would involve hunting everywhere for obscure dependencies (LilyPond in particular) so I just downloaded the Slackware packages, inspected them and found that by unzipping them onto the root folder (as superuser) and running the install script (if there is one) I can get them to run with minimal fuss.
Has the idea of making a Slackware to Arch package converter been brought up before? Is there any problems with this? (Slackware is i386-optimised if I remember correctly, but I think it's still worth it since there is more Slackware packages than Arch Linux ones out there.)

Answer 1

i3839 wrote:Flames?? Where? You sure you didn't misread something?
Probably.
Here's what I read, admitting that it doesn't seem quite as bad the second time around...:
Oh? All I was hearing is that Arch already has enough packages, and that the devs are overloaded and almost down.
"you don't know which way is up, you contradict yourself while continuing to ignore the problems and aren't fixing anything".
Also getting custom packages into Arch's official repository seems a bit hard currently, not to mention that it's totally unclear how to do that (drop it in incomming and wait a year? Lotto?).
"The system isn't working and you haven't done anything to try to fix it. I haven't read or noticed any of the threads illustrating that this topic has been argued to death and isn't going unnoticed"
Maintaining packages is the most work, and every distro maintains the same packages over and over again. Tell me why to not use good, working packages from another sane distro?
"The other distros are better."
(Personally, I don't care if anybody likes another distro better, but if so, use it instead, don't talk about it)
Changing GCC often gives the same problem as updating to new major libraries. Simply leave the old GCC libs or make a seperate package for them. Currently it's rather impossible in Arch to install new packages with an outdated system, if that's solved then it's also easy to use Slackware packages.
"The Arch philosophy of keeping packages stable but up to date is just plain wrong.  I don't bother to pacman -Syu before I mention problems."
Of course if would be best if there was a nice, good binary package standard that works on all distros, so that the application makers can make and maintain the packages themselves, but that's utopia (paths are too often hardcoded for instance).
"hey, I do have some good ideas".
It isn't a matter of being able to do something or not, it's a matter of convenience. All programs should be relative easy to compile from source, but that doesn't mean that everyone should compile all programs themselves.
"There aren't enough Arch binaries to go around"
OR:
"ABS sucks"
OR:
"Hold my hand, I can't compile."
OR:
"I use Arch cause I don't like Gentoo". :-D 
Yeah, some of that is a little (or quite, or even very) harsh, you can blame it on me rather than taking it to heart.
As for the slackware packages issue, I'm personally not writing a script to convert them; I've never used slackware in my life. The idea has merit, but I get tired of people discussing pros and cons and not doing anything. I think that's because I'm about as bad as anyone on that front, possibly worse.
Dusty