Roger, What you are saying is already present in certain Linux distributions (gentoo linux). Source based application or patch deployment is good only for individual desktops and that too developer desktops, who know what they are doing, when they need some library which is missing (may it be gtk or mpeg).
Even though I am not a programmer, I have created packages based on SVR (sun) and RPM (redhat). They are not that tough. In fact RPM based packaging is easy once you have your script in place. In fact what you are suggesting about installing from source can also be achieved using RPM. Not only does rpm command itself provide a way to compile from source rpm, but also within the RPM package itself, one can program it such a way to compile at install time. When I asked for better integration of pkg-get ( which is a Solaris only script, which downloads and installs Sun packages from sunfreeware.com), I was implying that the Sun's package manager (SVR) is pretty old and not keeping up with the recent times. pkg-get comes very close to apt-get (debian) or yum (centos). Yum is very well integrated into the OS, that you need not use up2date to actually install or update the OS. But pkg-get is not supported by SUN and does not update the "contents" database so pkginfo or pkgrm does not know about these packages. If SUN/OpenSolaris can revamp their packaging structure it would greatly help compete in Linux/freeBSD/BSDi world. Ultimately, all we want is an Operating System good not only for desktop, but also for servers in production. Think about how much downtime and hassle we will shed if we could update a whole server farm without having to download a patch bundle tailored to that server. (I hate Sun's auto updater or whatever they call it). (I have updated 20 Production Linux servers in 1 night (1 hour), compared to 2 hours of patch installs and reboots on a SUN server, of course not counting the minutes spent in downloading the tailored patch bundle (TLP). -GGR 8/1/07, Roger Marquis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Rajiv Gunja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2. Better update and product/software installation control. i.e. > > pkg-get integrated into the OS well enough to be able to see the > > new/sunfree software from pkginfo. Or at least get a package > > manager similar to apt-get/pkg-get/yum. > > Of all the areas where Sun has an opportunity to improve on Linux > distributions this has to be the most significant. Anyone who has > used a source distribution model, like FreeBSD's ports, knows what > a relative hassle it is to manage pkg, dpkg, and rpms packages. > > Maintaining a port is so much easier than maintaining an RPM. I'm > talking night and day. With ports you don't have to generate a > distinct specfile or build a separate binary package for every OS > version (multiplied by) every architecture. All you need is the > makefile and a few patches. When a new release comes out most of > the time all you need change is the makefile's version numbers > (assuming patches still apply cleanly, and most of the time they > do). > > Another big advantage to BSD-style ports is that you don't have to > compile-in every dependency a package user is likely to use. These > can all be resolved, by command line or menu, at install-time. > > The result is 1) a significantly smaller number of installed > packages with the same functionality, 2) up to date versions of > all software and all dependencies, and 3) a far more stable and > secure environment. > > None of this need have any impact on the end-user experience. The > same management tools can work with either source or binary (for > proprietary software) packages. As far as front-end models, my > vote goes to aptitude/synaptic though yum/yumex is almost as good. > > Even with Sun's proven ability to provide support (SunSolve), and > superior kernel architecture (mach), nothing has more potential to > take market share from other Unix/Linux distributions, in my > experience, than source-based package management. > > -- > Roger Marquis > Roble Systems Consulting > http://www.roble.com/ > _______________________________________________ > indiana-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss >
_______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
