Hi Ian, Am 12.08.2010 15:32, schrieb Ian Bull: > 1. The definition of 'shared' installs. If each user could update the > base then this is not really 'shared' anymore. Some users have SR1, > some have SR2, etc...
I started thinking more about this and I'm tending to say that Windows is *not* a shared install in terms of the original definition on Unix/Linux. I think there are different kinds of "shared" installs now. A) not really shared A user installs something into a protected area. During installation the user gained higher privileges (either automatically or on purpose). But generally the user is the owner of the system and is the exclusive user of the install. In essence only the installation location is write protected. A user may not even be aware of this (UAC). B) really shared An administrator installs something into a shared location to be used by multiple users. Case B clearly is a shared install. However, case A is different. That's the Windows 7 case (IMHO). I think it's wrong to treat it the same as case B. > 2. Consistency. If a users updates some bundles in the shared area, and > then the admin updates the base, what should we use now? This clearly applies to B but not to A. In case A user == admin, however, the user might not even be aware of this. I think p2 needs different strategies for case A and B and a smart decision when selecting a strategy. -Gunnar -- Gunnar Wagenknecht gun...@wagenknecht.org http://wagenknecht.org/ _______________________________________________ p2-dev mailing list p2-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
