Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tuesday, November 19, 2019 3:52:27 AM MST Petr Pisar wrote:
> If you start fidling with things in PATH, you have the problem of SCL. And
> as you wrote, SCL is terrible. And that was the reason why we have
> modularity: We do not want to relocate code to non-standard paths.

I may be a bit confused here, but I thought Modularity was not a replacement 
for SCLs? Clearly, it can't be, it doesn't provide even similar 
functionality.. With SCLs, as annoying as they are, you do get parallel 
installations, which Modularity cannot provide.

If parallel availability, without parallel installation, is all you want, I 
can show you how to do that with RPM right now, no Modularity required.

-- 
John M. Harris, Jr.
Splentity

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux