On 2006-12-06 13:54, Adi Pircalabu wrote: > John Andersen wrote: > >> extreemly late getting out updates to very time sensitive packages >> such as SpamAssassin. These packages are a month old. >> >> Cpan at most 24 hours old. >> > > 1. What is important for you may not be that important for others > Having the most recent virus definition files is not important? > 2. Newer does not always mean better/safer/faster. It rather means untested. > Certainly not in the case of virus definition files. >> A generic question: Why would it be so hard for a software updater >> package to check for the existance of packages installed by other >> means? >> > > Why would you want this mix-up of package & source installed software? > Especially, how can a vendor be able to offer support (a generic term > for, let's say, software assurance) > If a client requires a particular version of some software, so be it, > you'll tailor the solution for them. But the stock version should always > contain tested software. > I guess you don't care about your clients missing the occasional new virus that is only caught in the virus definition update that was released today.
-- The best way to accelerate a computer running Windows is at 9.81 m/s² -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
