Bowie Bailey wrote:
Bret Miller wrote:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Gary Funck wrote:
Has anyone considered also supplying new rules in the
form of rpm's available via a yum-compatible repository?
It'd be nice to have the usual versioning and logging
support as well as a central update facility. This
could be done as a gateway to sa-update, perhaps
providing the updates in other package formats as well.
This is purely a philosophical argument, but something seems
wrong about the idea of using a package manager to manage
volatile data files in /var.
It also has the same problems as sa-update. It's not very useful
unless you have one package/channel per ruleset and that is a bit
excessive considering that a ruleset is just a single file.
From my perspective, RDJ does a great job of handling the add-on
rulesets. It's simple and flexible. Why fix something that isn't
broken?
RDJ doesn't work in native Windows. Sa-update does. In my mind, that
makes RDJ *broken* if you're running Windows.
RDJ is a bash script. It was written to run on the *nix systems that
most people use for SA.
It shouldn't be that difficult to create a version that works on
Windows. My approach would be to port it to Perl and use LWP to do
the file transfers.
I think everyone is missing the point here. This isnt a discussion
about porting RDJ to windows or even about RDJ itself.
SA now has an application that is similar to RDJ in its function. This
is an offical part of SA and not an unsupported (by the SA team) add on.
The "if it aint broken, why fix it" argument doesnt apply here as its
now being included with SA itself. Its like saying hey look cars now
come with seatbelts direct from the factory but im going to rip them out
and install someone elses. Theres just no point to it. sa-update can
be used to (among other things) replace RDJ. It runs on windows an
*nix. Why would anyone spend their time even further developing RDJ,
nevermind porting it to another OS when SA now has the same
functionality built in?
-Jim
