On 12/18/2012 09:56 AM, Philip Robar wrote:
> I've noticed that there seems to be a fair amount of dislike for IPS which
> leaves me puzzled. On paper IPS sounds great and I know that some serious
> thought, engineering and math went into the design of IPS. I also know that
> despite the claims of SVR4 packaging fans that SVR4 packages have their own
> limitations--especially when it comes to patching systems. (Fortunately my
> own scars from my days of packaging software for Solaris faded long ago and
> only dim memories of those days remain. :-)
> 
> I'm particularly curious as I know one of the engineers who worked on IPS
> and he's one of the smartest people I've ever met.
> 
> Are the objections to IPS centered on its design or implementation, or
> both? Are the SVR4 fans blind to its limitations and/or ignoring difficult
> problems that can't be ignored in a business/enterprise environment? If
> there are any objective and reasoned writing or discussion on the subject
> I'd appreciate a pointer.

I, for one, would like to voice my support for IPS. I come originally
from a Debian-based background, so having a fully integrated package
manager with automatic dependency/conflict resolution, network
repositories and binary packages is a step in the right direction from
my perspective.

Cheers,
--
Saso


-------------------------------------------
illumos-discuss
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/182180/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/182180/21175430-2e6923be
Modify Your Subscription: 
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21175430&id_secret=21175430-6a77cda4
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to