Patches seem to come in two flavors:
1. Packaged patches -- some vendors roll up (sets of) patches into a package
that the package manager can deal with.
2. Simple patches -- (sets of) files that a vendor deems has to get out now for
some bug -- the vendor may or may not have time to "package"-ize it, but will
merely document it.
Obviously, therefore, the form of patches can be as varied as packages (or even
more than!). Every vendor has his own favorite ways -- from simple tarballs of
files to shell/Perl scripts to real packages.
David Masterson
Symbol Technologies
>>> Tim Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/17/05 03:34PM >>>
Hi all. My system doesn't have to deal with patches (being a
Linux system and all), but I was wondering if it would be effective to
treat patches as a type of package.
Common features (guessing here):
- Install, Upgrade, Remove, and Checkversion are the main actions
- Both have dependencies
-
Would it be reasonable to treat patches as a case of packages?
Can I have some input from someone who knows about patches? (Chip? :) ).
:)
--
Tim Nelson
Server Administrator
WebAlive Technologies Global
Level 1 Innovation Building, Digital Harbour
1010 LaTrobe Street
Docklands, Melbourne,
Vic, 3008
Phone: +61 3 9934 0812
Fax: +61 3 9934 0899
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.webalive.biz/
"Your Business, Your Web, Your Control"
_______________________________________________
Help-cfengine mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for computer viruses.
_______________________________________________
Help-cfengine mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
