On Thursday 09 December 2004 6:10 pm, Aleksandar Milivojevic wrote: > Jumping in the discussion late. What OP suggested is basically the way > patches were handled in Solaris. With exception that they are not named > foo-patch1, but rater 232187-06 and you are left to guess which > package(s) that patch will patch ;-) HP-UX also uses this mechanism with their Software-Depot system (SD-UX) and it also has the weird naming conventions for patches. Also, a patch may supersede another one and so on... I really wanted to find out if there was another good reason (besides simplicity) on having our current system. So far I think we can say these are the pros & cons. Whole-packages update system ---------------------------------------------- Pros: - simplicity Cons: - package size overhead Patch-based update system -------------------------------------- Pros: - no size overhead (in most cases) Cons: - manegeability Jorge
