Les Mikesell wrote: > Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: > >> As far as having more then one version of an application installed >> at a time, I can just picture the problems that would cause most >> users. > > It wouldn't be a requirement. And it would make Linux as difficult to > use as a Mac... > >> You can ignore the package manager all together, and install one >> version in the /usr/local or /opt tree after compiling it yourself. > > Of course, and I'd wager that virtually every developer does exactly > that for himself, building and testing multiple versions at the same > time for anything where it might make sense. And then they ignore the > reasons they had for doing that and package it so no one else can. > > But, are you really recommending that everyone who wants current apps > and a stable kernel should install Centos and build all their apps from > source in /usr/local? Yes, it works, and yes I do some of that, but I > don't think for a second that it is the right answer to this problem. > No - I am saying that if you want more then one version of an app installed at the same time, then that is one way to do it. That was the problem that I was addressing, but you took it out of context and applied your own spin to it to make it look like I said something I did not. But I guess if you can not refute the origional statement, that is what you have to do. I am also saying they should use one of the repo's that has more up to date packages. If they can not find the package, then they should get the spec file from the older version, and update it to use the new version. It would be nice if they also provided the new RPM to the repo. You know - giving something back to the community that is providing the os in the first place. Mikkel -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
