Re: Independant (or free) updater ?

[Karl Gutenberg <GlueSoft gmx de>]

Hello,

> > >  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.

There is a cost of using automated systems, isn't there? I guess you missed 
that the original statement was about wether rmpfind's database should be 
centralistic, as it wisely is, or decentralistic.

The topic was not RPM by itself.

And from what I remember, rpm allows you to oversee what an installation 
process will do. Quite better than a "make install" at times.... So what is 
your point here even if RPM was the topic?

> > 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.

You will note that freedom of choice allows for diversity. And you will note 
that Linux is about to be giving the user all freedoms he desires. And if one 
lacks, I can add it myself. I like that.

Now you are talking of a business enviroment. First it must be said, that 
Linux is ideal to keep all computers in-sync with software, since it's cost 
free. But then again, support must be given for software aspects that end 
users cannot control. But the mission of Linux is a different one. Give the 
end user full control over their desktop computer.

Well, you might come to the conclusion that config restricted Windows 
desktops, pre-configured by admins are the next big thing with such an 
attidude... but MS failed to push that into market. A really bad sign for the 
idead...... because there definitely is a trade-off when you take away 
freedom from people. But I guess, sys-admin kinds of types, don't even dare 
of dreaming of a world without them managing all machines, but only a few 
that need special attention.

> > 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.

Well, yes. And why wouldn't one RPM install on all distributions? It's 
certainly possible, you know. It just rarely happens when a software becomes 
more complex.

That's why I wish the standards grounds would be more advanced. In many 
fields, the differences that exist, just don't matter, they just exist and 
make life harder to create a RPM for all distributions. In the cause, this 
leads to nothing but trouble to all that use Linux.

> > 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"?

I am sure able to write the database, but I didn't do it. That for clarity. I 
will aid the project in a hopefully surprising way soon enough though. :-)

> > 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...

Hm, I guess, you had a bad day. Chill. One could easily point you to reading 
more than just the post you answer. One could as well point to weaknesses in 
your post, like "what new information" did you contribute? But hey, war is 
for kids and governments.... :-)

See you, Karl