[indiana-discuss] Better update and product/software installation control

[Keith Bierman]

On Aug 1, 2007, at 12:31 PM, Rajiv Gunja wrote:

> Roger,
> My comments are in Blue:
> .....
>
> To tell you the truth, the last time I was working on BSD was in   
> 1996-98 and have not touched it since.  Also if what  you say is  
> true, why is it still not popular even thought it existed even  
> before Linux became popular?

Let's not dig ourselves into arguments about marketshare, conflated  
with technical superiority (otherwise it's Windows >> Solaris, game  
set and match).

While there is much to commend ports, and BSD in general, I think  
there are two factors going against source distribution:

1)  I think we should strive for commonality between the commercial  
Solaris and the OpenSolaris
2)  Source distribution is inconsistent with most ISV behavior

(1) and (2) conspire to make binary distribution the primary  
mechanism in my not so humble opinion.
> ....ou honestly think that any sane company will install a compiler  
> on their production server? or in fact let the SA tweak software  
> installs at the last minute? If they do, they must have no  
> standards or procedure or run by armatures.

Well, back in the day, SunOS required recompilation to add or delete  
devices ... and it was certainly used by non amateurs ;> But the  
world has moved on, and the ability to function in a binary mode is  
an advantage. Having the ability to also handle source distribution  
would be a plus for those that want it (being able to recompile for  
the local platform does have performance advantages).



Keith H. Bierman    keith.bierman at Sun.COM   |  khbkhb at gmail.com
Strategic Engagement Team                   | AIM: kbiermank
http://blogs.sun.com/khb                    |
<speaking for myself, not Sun*> Copyright 2007




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/attachments/20070801/4d1aa7f0/attachment.html