hi On 06.12.2006, at 17:33, Andy Bakun wrote: ... > > This is too bad, because in my opinion swup's lack of a captive user > interface (I'm talking to you yum and apt! what's with all the yes/no > questions that might or might not be asked?) and relative speed > (through > caching) makes it overall simpler, faster, and more consistent than > other package management options.
lack of interface?? call it swup's superior design decision that there isn't a user interaction game. As you said, it makes package management on other systems look horrible broken, if I want to install something I'll get it if I manage to name it. I'm tired of years with SuSE, their mismanagement of MY CONFIG files, not to mention thousands of apt dialogs with no chance to wander through them again without knowing more then the internals (my first time debian was "ohmygod,wronganswer,removepackage,installpackageagain,butnoquestion,WTF ?) because the config file was left in the system, but I'll never managed to get back to the dialog. this three state logic of the interface scared the hell out of me, and I somehow understand it is hard to implement on a general purpose distro, but on a server distro?? but that might just be my preference ... or not? matthias ps: please stay away from flaming me ... call apt with this or that command line ... if I have to do that, to get a simple question asked, then I prefer the command line in general, b/c I'll have to deal with it anyway ... _______________________________________________ tsl-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.trustix.org/mailman/listinfo/tsl-discuss
