Adventurous yet Safety-Minded

[yersinia]

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Alexander Kahl <e-user at fsfe.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/10/2010 01:06 PM, Steven I Usdansky wrote:
> There is no real recovery for traditional package systems as each change
> on a package (install, update, remove etc.) changes the state of the
> system as a whole, i.e. the system relies on side effects (mostly
> writing files into shared/global locations) and provides no referential
> transparency for such actions, same output for same input is never
> guaranteed.
>
My (silly perhaps) personal opinion that the rollback part of a package
management system depends very much on QA which are made the same packages
in first place. The way you write  seems that the problem is insoluble for a
package manager: if so it did seem strange that several rpm developers have
lost so time to implement it in the first place and to extend it over time.
But I think this has already been discussed in the past, many time. For
example http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2008-February/001912.html

and

http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-list/2009-April/000227.html

http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-list/2009-April/000231.html

But the problem is always relevant
http://www.mancoosi.org/work/#wp3

Regards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100311/d35a7c9a/attachment-0001.html