On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Bruce Sass <bsass@evsmail.com> [2005.04.03.0122 +0200]:I would go with a) because it is more likely to result in consistency between systems and across time; although b), with its bit more work for the admin, would be more satisfying and instructive.explain how more consistency can be achieved, please?
If it is coded, and generally does the right thing: packagers are less likely to make different choices for similar problems, admins may not need to make a choice at all, practices/policy(?) can be changed across the distribution at once instead of on a pkg by pkg basis.
What I was thinking about when I wrote that last message would actually be the glue or translation layer between the package management system and what you (afaict) have in mind for a).You want to port YAST to Debian?
I don't know what YAST does, so, maybe. :) re: brittlness of reference countingI suppose it would be necessary to be able to easily generate a set of counts and users from a list of packages, and quickly check the consistency of that set with the actual system. The counts could only be used if the consistency check passed.
- Bruce