Re: dpkg feature implementation
* dE . <email@example.com> [2010-01-05 12:13]:
> The developers and administrators will have to understand my point.
> This is the only reason why people refuse to install any Linux OS. I
> really don't have an answer to these simple windows users when they
> say "what about offline software installation?". Now I cant explain
> them technical procedures to it, they'll happily reject it.
As "simple" as with windows: get the CD/DVD.
> Security and size problems of super deb packages will always be there
> with such packages, this is a major disadvantage, but considering
> super deb packages will remove this major drawback with Linux...it
> think it's worth it.
You can build any Package statically linked which pretty much is the
same as Windows applications. However this introduces the security
nightmare Windows has: 10 installed programs have 10 different versions
of libraries statically linked and if a bug is found in the library
you're mostly left alone as some vendors will provide an update, some
won't and you can not be sure that all 10 applications are either fixed
or the version they have statically linked doesn't bear the security
> If this system is made to commence, all people who have refused to
> install Linux is cause of it's packaging system (IMO, to all people
> who have rejected so far under my knowledge) will have no problems
> installing it. They don't have problems with root folder, nor the
> mount system...they only have problems with this."
I doubt's that's a huge number and that their arguments are based on
good arguments. It's quite a task to keep a Windows system secure with
all the (montly) updates without Internet connection and when you buy
new peripherals (e.g. printers, scanners) and you happen to run XP you
most likely want to dump the driver shipped with the hardware and get
the curent one via Internet.