Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 14th Sep 2002 22:44 UTC
SuSE, openSUSE From SuSE Linux 8.1 on, YaST2 comes with a new, powerful package manager. It supersedes the classic YaST2 single package selection and integrates the YaST Online Update (YOU) and post-installation add-on selection at the same time. It lays the foundation for supporting multiple installation sources like a traditional set of SuSE CDs, add-on product CDs, patch CDs, FTP servers or even local directories - all of which may contain software packages to install. Specially optimized versions were implemented for both graphical user interface (the YaST2 Qt UI) or text interface (the YaST2 NCurses UI), providing each type of user with the tool that best fits his needs. Read more for the commentary.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by null_pointer_us on Mon 16th Sep 2002 18:15 UTC

No, you've entirely missed the point. Whether or not the newer one will work is a toss-up thanks to Microsoft's development practices.

No, I think you missed my point. The third party developers are to blame for their own problems because they did not bother to write programs in accordance with the API's they were given. Whether or not the newer one will work is a toss-up thanks to third party development practices.

Windows XP solves the DLL version related problems introduced by third party installation programs because it allows multiple versions of a DLL with the same filename to coexist within the system directory and then provides each program with its own version of that DLL.

You obviously have a very different philosophy on operating systems than I have.

I certainly hope so. My philosophy on operating systems is that it is the system's job to prevent third party programs from interfering with each other and the system itself. I believe that allowing third party applications to mess up each other and the system while doing a simple thing like installing software is stupid. You can call that freedom if you like, but it remains stupid.

I suppose that we should fault MS for use the x86's memory protection features, too, for that would prevent third party programs from mucking about in system memory?

I believe in freedom and in the fact that there's more than one way to accomplish any task.

So why allow third parties to *force* the user to use a buggy installer that can't even properly remove the program it installed? I would rather force the third parties to behave so that the users can be assured that the software packages the user has installed can be properly removed when the user so chooses.

You seem to believe in forcing people to do things your way or not at all.

Yeah, and I even run a firewall and some anti-virus software to prevent Joe Virus Writer from overwriting my boot sector. Poor Joe!