Thoughts and Questions On Yum, Up2Date. Etc.

[shrek-m at gmx.de]

Davy Brion wrote:

> up2date has no way of listing available packages that aren't installed
>
>already... not sure if the CLI version allows it, but the GUI version
>doesn't. so up2date doesn't allow 'adding new software from official
>repositories'
>  
>

update is_not install

$ man up2date
NAME
       Update Agent - a program for updating packages on Red Hat Linux


>i know most of us dislike microsoft, but as much as we dislike them, you
>have to give them credit for making things easy for _normal_ users.
>  
>

and for viruses, worms, trojans, spyware, addware, ...

but ms-windows is not admin-friendly :-(

>Linux distro's in general have the tendency to make some important tasks
>anything but easy for newcomers. Do you honestly think this is the
>correct approach?  For your sake, i hope not
>
>>f your main arguement is "This isn't how
>>Microsoft would do things" you have already lost.
>>    
>>
>if your argument is 'we shouldn't do this just because microsoft does
>it' then you shouldn't be arguing about how an operating system should
>work in the first place.
>

good bye security.

> For a lot of users, microsoft does a good job
>in making things easy and simple...
>

especially for virus-writers,
but surely not for admins.

> there's no shame at all in copying
>that approach.
>  
>

sure,
every day a lot of new viruses, ...
eg.
http://sophos.co.uk/downloads/ide/


wake up and see what microsoft had produced in the last 10 years.

a lot of promises
a lot of money
a lot of buggy and insecure software
a lot of d... users
a lot of d... admins
...

i find nothing what is it worth to copy to linux, bsd, ...



-- 
shrek-m