On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Alexander Kahl <e-u...@fsfe.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 03/10/2010 01:06 PM, Steven I Usdansky wrote: > There is no real recovery for traditional package systems as each change > on a package (install, update, remove etc.) changes the state of the > system as a whole, i.e. the system relies on side effects (mostly > writing files into shared/global locations) and provides no referential > transparency for such actions, same output for same input is never > guaranteed. > My (silly perhaps) personal opinion that the rollback part of a package management system depends very much on QA which are made the same packages in first place. The way you write seems that the problem is insoluble for a package manager: if so it did seem strange that several rpm developers have lost so time to implement it in the first place and to extend it over time. But I think this has already been discussed in the past, many time. For example http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2008-February/001912.html and http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-list/2009-April/000227.html http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-list/2009-April/000231.html But the problem is always relevant http://www.mancoosi.org/work/#wp3 Regards
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
