Re: 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.

It's a little exemple.

On Sun, 17 Sep 2000, Karl Gutenberg wrote:
> Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:34:03 +0000
> To: Daniel Veillard <Daniel Veillard w3 org>,
> 	Philippe Roy <ph_roy yahoo com>
> From: Karl Gutenberg <GlueSoft gmx de>
> Subject: Re: Independant (or free) updater ?
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> > > My idea is decentralization.
> 
> [...]
> 
> >  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 
> server redundancy I wouldn't even fear a downtime of the central system,
> you know DoS-attacks hit good systems just like bad ones.
> 
> What i like about the database used, is that it is open to other code as 
> well. Like GnoRpm and findrpm both can use it and if I decide I don't
> like 
> their ways, I can do my ways into it.
> 
> 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 would wish though, that the standards efforts would be far enough to
> make 
> sure that no application needs different RPMs for different
> distributions. 
> 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.
> 
> 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?
> 
> Yours, Karl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-list mailing list
> gnome-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list