On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 11:29 -0400, Horst H. von Brand wrote: > What about computer labs (or other places) where "user installs random > software" is *not* wellcome? What about packages that require sysadmin > configuration (define local configuration, start server, ...)? Sure, as I've pointed out before this is all fine-grained policy that an admin can set per user or per machine. > > Installing files automatically > > > > Simon wants to borrow the computer while Suzanne waits for OpenOffice to > > download. He uses fast-user switching to switch to a new login. He > > notices the same downloading icon in his session which indicates > > Suzannes' download is still in progress. He starts Pidgin which then > > crashes. The bug-buddy window appears which prompts him to install the > > debuginfo so a valid backtrace can be detected. He clicks yes, and a > > libnotify windows appears telling Simon that the request has been queued > > and that he will be notified when the debuginfo has been installed. When > > installed, the bug-buddy helper continues and submits a valid bug. > > This is /not/ "installing automatically", it is another user installing > new stuff while another install is running. Now you need to distinguish > between users that are allowed to install stuff and those that aren't > allowed to do so. Sure, I don't see that a problem. > A similar case is that Suzanne gets bored waiting for OOo, and asks for > a (smallish) game to kill time. > > Again, what about situations where installing random stuff should not be > allowed? Lock it down using system policy... > All the above presuposes a /huge/ bandwidth to the 'net (or at least to > a nearby mirror). Plus nearly unlimited disk space (yes, the sum total > of what the users will end up installing by just random twiddling /is/ > everything). Not my case, unfortuntely. And I suspect that is the case > of lots of Fedora users. My home desktop system gets a new package a month installed. This use-case isn't spec'ed for the enterprise, but that's configurable to make it valid. > sudo + a configuration that allows running "yum install foo" or "yumex" > for assorted users is almost enough for all of the above, plus gives > some extra control. I don't see a burning need for any of this, to tell > the truth. Sure, I can understand that point of view too. I would also like you to show my non-techy girlfriend how to use yum or yumex when all she wants to do is open a odf file. :-) Richard. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
