From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101013/001160.html | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101013/001160.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101013/001160.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101013/001160.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101013/001160.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..1f440a581 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101013/001160.html @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Proposal: Updating released versions (long post) + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] Proposal: Updating released versions (long post)

+ Renaud MICHEL + r.h.michel+mageia at gmail.com +
+ Wed Oct 13 23:59:59 CEST 2010 +

+
+ +
On Wednesday 13 octobre 2010 at 23:34, Frank Griffin wrote :
+> One way of doing it might be, having identified packages that require
+> this sort of support, to wrap the executables with scripts that do this
+> the next time a user runs the software before the real executable is
+> launched.
+
+Now that's getting very hackish.
+I'd rather not have many programs wrapped in scripts that would do some 
+magic on my home dir under the hood. Because with such a "solution" the 
+programs would be always wrapped, even if you never do a rollback.
+How would such script detect that it actually was a rollback and it should 
+do his magic on the config files.
+What would happen if the user did not run that program between the update 
+and the rollback?
+
+It seems the complexity is not worth the benefit, and those scripts are 
+likely to not be well tested and might make things worse if things are not 
+like they expected.
+
+-- 
+Renaud Michel
+
+ + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1