Hi,
>>"Michael" == Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Michael> Because that doesn't do anything for the new user who
Michael> doesn't discover that he wants to do this until _after_ he
Michael> thinks something is wrong. A redhat support list can say "do
Michael> x to verify your system", which has a certain advantage over
Michael> "do x to verify your system, assuming you did y when you
Michael> installed everything."
Putting things in the packaging system so that we can be sure
they have it in the system is really silly, seeing that we have this
marvelous dependency mechanism. (Do you know what it means when a
package is deemed Essential?) Create a package, tehn, and one may
put put in the docs (or the support list): install XYZ, and that
would periodically run a system verification program.
If you want this to be on the system by default, make
the security package essential (I would object to that, though). This
is really a very poor argument for including stuff in the packaging
system when it does not belong there.
Unlike MS and others, I don't thikn we should be forcing
people into paths we decide are good. Inform the newcomers that
security packages are available, and let people decide what they want
to do.
The more I hear about this, the more half baked the whole
thing sounds.
manoj
--
Though one were to live a hundred years without seeing the deathless
state, the life of a single day is better if one sees the deathless
state. 114
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
