On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Bernie Innocenti <ber...@codewiz.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 14:48 -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > >> For a future release cycle, we may want to re-evaluate yum-updatesd as >> an alternative to olpc-updates which provides different trade-offs in >> terms of performance, robustness and distro integration. At the time >> olpc-update was written, yum was still awfully buggy and unreliable.
This wasn't why olpc-update was designed differently than yum. At litl we use an apt-based distro. We still have a whole-system update tool. I believe it to be a fundamental mistake to confuse package-based update tools with image-based update tools. Which is entirely orthogonal to the "local package installation" question -- but I couldn't let you get so far off track in your second sentence. Let's keep our terminology straight: "image updater", "root-only package updater", and "local user package updater". These are three different tasks, and could easily be three separate tools, for three different use cases. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel