Corporate pressure

david paeme david.paeme at belbone.net
Tue Feb 3 08:21:27 UTC 2004


popup on first run...

i think that that's a better idea that the apt/yum/rpm thing.


but imagine the scared look on joe average's face when his favorite
website doesn't display ;-)


(and how about drivers?)



On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 09:18, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2 Feb 2004, david paeme wrote:
> > 
> > >wouldn't it be a good idea to include some kind of license acceptance
> > >mechanism into apt/yum/rpm? 
> > 
> > It is an explicit goal and requirement of RPM that all RPM 
> > packages must be installable without user input of any kind, in 
> > order to facilitate automatic unattended installation, or 
> > installation/upgrade from cronjob/script, etc.
> > 
> > I don't know apt or yum's policies or goals in this regard so 
> > I'll let their respective authors, etc. answer for them though.
> > 
> > 
> > >for example, to get adobe acrobat to install, the user would get a
> > >prompt to accept the adobe license, which he can (and the software
> > >installs), or not (so, it doesn't install...).
> > 
> > Again, unacceptable to rpm.  That belongs in some frontend, 
> > either yum/apt/up2date or some Installshield type of rpm package 
> > wrapper install tool.
> 
> And just as unacceptable for apt-rpm. In Debian packages can ask questions 
> but that's another story.
> 
> If vendors want popup EULA's they can show them on first launch of the 
> software, we don't that mess into package managers/frontends.
> 
> 	- Panu -
> 





More information about the devel mailing list