Re: Independant (or free) updater ?

[Philippe Roy <ph_roy yahoo com>]

With a little exemple : the famous 'balsa'

- my balsa version : 0.8.1 (stable version) for redhat6

- with rpmfind at rpmfind.net : balsa-0.4.9
- with rpmfind with gnorpm : balsa-0.4.9
- with helix code updater : evolution
- only freshmeat/gnome.org + wget.



On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, David Lloyd wrote:
> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 09:10:21 +0930
> To: Karl Gutenberg <GlueSoft gmx de>
> From: David Lloyd <lloy0076 rebel net au>
> Subject: Re: Independant (or free) updater ?
> 
> 
> Karl et al:
> 
> > >  Don't even bother me until you get it working ... then we will
> > > discuss about decentralization ... of course if you stick to
> > > tar.gz you don't keep track of dependancies, sure the tool have
> > > far less problem to solve. But then you're back to Windows way of
> > > managing systems and I'm certainly not interested in this.
> 
> > I certainly agree with this statement. Besides, I see no problems come
> from
> > centralization of the information about releases. None at all. With
> some
> 
> Apart from the fact that RPM can make people wholly ignorant of their
> systems.
> 
> > What I do see a problem in, is the diversity of distributions needs.
> Sure, I
> > won't want to live in a all-SuSE world where all systems are setup just
> the
> > same. Different priorities will always lead to different configurations
> and
> > the Linux is a free system, free to be configured just the way you
> like.
> 
> I agree. In a business environment running multiple versions -- even of
> the same distribution -- is quite ridiculous. It adds to support costs,
> not to mention confusion. You may not want to live in an "all SuSe"
> world, but I may wish to. Diversity is the answer, but diversity for
> diversity's sake is not.
> 
> > I would wish though, that the standards efforts would be far enough to
> make
> > sure that no application needs different RPMs for different
> distributions.
> 
> If all the distributions were the same they wouldn't be different
> distributions. Perhaps that's an obvious, even sarcastic, statement but
> it is true.
> 
> > Like there was a layer on top of Redhat, SuSE, etc. where scripts could
> be
> > pluged in and they layer would forward it to the places where they are
> called
> > in a distro normally.
> 
> Given that you are able to write to the database, why don't you start
> the "Linux Layer on Top of RPM Project"?
> 
> > But I dream, embedded Linux, desktop Linux and mainframe Linux, how can
> I
> > dare think of the conflicting interests lead to a unified installation
> > process in the century?
> 
> You just did. I'm sure if you did rpm -qa MY.INTERNAL.DATABASE you would
> find a package called brain. I wonder whether it's lacking any
> dependencies...
> 
> DL
> -- 
> We are are determined to be people...
> ....we don't have to live like we are forced to live.
>  - Dr Martin Luther King, Jr
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-list mailing list
> gnome-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list