On 10/06/2010 11:06 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-10-06 1:04 AM, Scott Furry wrote:
>> Any installation method that is deployed, in my mind, must 'respect'
>> the package management of the base operating system.
>
> +1 - So, for most *nix's, this would mean that the built-in LibO updater
> should be disabled, and let the systems package manager take care of it.
Yes, I think so. For a yum/RPM system, for example, it would be nice if
the initial install of LibO was accomplished by having the user
configure a yum repository (which is simple and short), not by
downloading a huge installation file manually. Automating this kind of
yum configuration is possible with an RPM. I.e., the developers create
an RPM that does nothing but configure the user's yum repos, and expose
that RPM to the users via the website. Then installations and updates
can be as simple as
# yum install libreoffice
and
# yum update libreoffice
The yum package manager would then be able to handle dependencies,
resuming downloads after a broken connection, etc., in a robust way.
Then we wouldn't have to use a ./setup script that bypasses the package
manager, or manually install a desktop menus RPM.
----Jon
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to
[email protected]
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
