Re: WSJ: Mossberg takes the Linux bait and snarls ....

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Andrew Kelly wrote:

That's almost the model that I foresee actually working for whatever unix-like system implements it first. Make the package manager just a bit smarter and add a 'publish' button somewhere so a person who had configured a nicely working system could export his installed package list and custom configuration settings, and it would result in a URL that anyone else could click to duplicate that setup slightly more closely than matching kickstart installs would. That way someone could tweak a machine to someone like Mossberg's satisfaction, he could push a button, and the next day a million people could be running "Mossberg's recommended Linux". Or the same for someone who actually knows how to configure a linux box...
Outstanding idea, Les. You know if anybody is currently working on
anything like that?
No, everyone wants to make up new distribution names, spin CD's and build incompatible repositories instead of cooperating and making a package manager smart enough to do this.

Oh, you're talking about a completely new package manager. I thought you
just meant something standalone which would/could export a config,
basically building a better mousetrap in a kickstart sense of things.

That's a start - I'd probably do an extremely minimal kickstart install followed by a yum install of a complete packagelist generated by some invocation of 'rpm -q' on the master machine. But the install isn't quite the point. I want to be able to track subsequent changes on that master machine over the next many years at whatever interval the admin exports updated lists, and I want to be able to switch to duplicate some different master at any time.

Yum could almost do this, given repositories containing all of the needed packages/versions but would need some help in terms of rolling local config changes on the master into some sort of packages and dealing with which packages and config items are really local (hostname, ip address, etc.), which are hardware related, and which can be duplicated. In my opinion, local/hardware/software-virtual settings should never have been put in the same files to start with, but...

Whatever. I'm in, either way.
I've been looking for something of that magnitude as an anchor project
in a long-term thing I'm currently conceptualising.

The big problem would be having a stable repository containing all needed packages in all versions that might be referenced by any packagelist and a place to upload the master lists.

You in, too? Or are you in more of a "peel me another grape" place right
now?

I'm not in a position to write a lot of code or provide the repository space, but I've sampled a lot of grapes and can comment on which are suitable for general consumption. Personal opinion again, but the thing that makes unix-like systems unsuitable for personal desktop use is that there is just too much administration involved if everyone has to do it all individually - and a few dozen expertly installed/maintained systems could handle virtually everyone's desktop needs as long as the ability to add new packages is still available. But "maintained" is the operative word there - when the master updates or changes package versions the copies need to track the changes over the life of the machine.

--
  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx



[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux