Re: Packaging and installation
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Nicholas Petreley wrote:
> As I'm sure you know already, I wrote about packaging in a recent
> column. But I wanted to address a different aspect of it here, in
> hopes that we'll throw out (IMO the incorrect) idea of declaring RPM
> as a standard format and instead adopt a more useful, flexible and
> constructive approach to the problem.
Hasn't this been beaten to death by now? I think that most agree that
while using RPM may not be the best solution, it's definitely the most
practical solution for now.
I would think that our time would be better spent on discussing things
that we don't have done yet. I'm not against discussing this, but most of
the time the only folks that participate in a discussion on RPM are those
that have some personal problem with RPM and/or Red Hat.
My advice would be to stay the course and get this sucker done. :-)
Jeffrey.
o-----------------------------------o
| Jeffrey Watts |
| watts@jayhawks.net o-----------------------------------------o
| Systems Programmer | "If Raymond is Pepsi, with fashionable |
| Network Systems Management | marketing, Stallman is the original |
| Sprint Communications | Coke, and the choice of a Gnu |
o----------------------------| generation..." |
| -- Lloyd Wood, on ESR and RMS |
o-----------------------------------------o
Reply to: