[Rpm-maint] Re: [lsb-discuss] [packaging] RFC: Berlin Packaging API
robert.schweikert at mathworks.com
Thu Feb 28 15:01:47 UTC 2008
Dan Kegel wrote:
> <robert.schweikert at mathworks.com> wrote:
>> > Apps that are installed without root access should not
>> > be announced to the package manager.
>> Why not?
> Because the package manager only manages apps
> that are installed for all users.
Just because it is user installed doesn't mean other users cannot use
the installed application.
> Bending it to manage packages that are owned by
> a user, and therefore are not reliably available to other
> users, is torture. Best invent some other sort of
> user-installed-app manager and not bother the system package manager.
I don't think we want to invent a new system. The same app could be
installed by a user or by root. Do we now force the installer to check
who the installing user is and then either register with the package
manager or the newly invented system? I don't think this should be the
installers job. I think w would get little traction if we pushed such
complications into the ISV space.
Now if the underlying packaging system wants to make the distinction
that's fine with me. In the end I doubt ISVs care whether the app
information is stored in database A or B. The key is to be able to put
the information in when installing as root and/or non root and to get
the information back out when using either a GUI interface to the
package manager, or the command line, or the proposed API. If the
package management systems wants to manage multiple package dbs or store
everything in one db and tag the information or not is an implementation
detail the client of the proposed API shouldn't have to care about.
> - Dan
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
(robert.schweikert at mathworks.com) LINUX
The MathWorks Inc.
Phone : 508-647-2042
More information about the Rpm-maint