lloy0076 wrote:
This discussion seems to be spinning around in circles. There is a lot
of benefit to an "apt" like packaging system but clearly a good number
of organisations and individuals have gotten by with Solaris without
such a packaging system.
That is neither wrong, nor right. It just IS.
Solaris didn't arise like GNU/Linux so its packaging systems and
upgrade systems reflect a different mindset than those of GNU/Linux.
That is neither wrong, nor right. It just IS.
There's obviously a place for all the current ways a Solaris system
can be upgraded and adding a new way to upgrade doesn't mean some, any
or all of those older ways need to be altered or discarded.
I would tender that upgrading a system that used to come from only one
single source who had a lot of control over the hardware the system
was installed on would make for a different upgrading system than one
that is designed to work on disparate hardware, where there are lots
of sources and not all of them in agreeance with each other.
So, rather than having a "they're wrong, we're right and we'll come up
with some hair brained way to trip the opponents up", why don't we
simply evaluate what our current knowledge is, look at what is out
there and see how things can be improved?
Flash versus Live Upgrade versus "apt" versus "yum" versus a Windows
Like Upgrade discussions are pointless in and of themselves. I'd
prefer to see more "We like apt because..." or "We think Live Upgrade
is good/bad because..." and so forth.
DSL
Thank you! I don't care how it's implemented, I'd simply like to see
some functionality added. The current system is working great for some
people, and that's nice .... it is just my opinion that with some added
functionality, we could really shine.
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
