Re: SEUL: Observatons

[jfm2@club-internet.fr]

   Delivered-To: jfm@sidney.remcomp.fr
   X-Authentication-Warning: mail.txcc.net: majordomo set sender to owner-seul-project using -f
   Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 18:57:32 -0500
   From: Michael Peck <mjpeck@mailhost.rsn.hp.com>
   Organization: Hewlett-Packard
   X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/780)
   MIME-Version: 1.0
   References: <19970626211559.315.qmail@sidney.remcomp.fr>
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
   Sender: owner-seul-project@mail.txcc.net
   Precedence: bulk
   Reply-To: seul-project@mail.txcc.net
   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
   X-UIDL: 2ec0e671559e70e1094f820a3b653567

   jfm2@club-internet.fr wrote:
   > 
   >    From: Micah Yoder <yoderm@geocities.com>
   >    X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; Linux 2.0.27 i486)
   > 
   >    jfm2@club-internet.fr wrote:
   >    >
   >    > I disagree. The fact is than the VGA server will run with *almost* any
   >    > card.  But not all.
   >    > There are PCs with NVidia Cards (correct me if I am wrong but that is
   >    > a modern card) that won't run with the VGA server.  They will run with
   >    > their specific server however.
   >    > And there are other cards where the VGA server will only support 320x200.
   > 
   >    [snip]
   >    >
   >    > Also 8 meg machines will have a hard time with an X based install.
   > 
   >    OK, points taken.  Curses it is!
   > 
   >    > Sorry but here in France day time phone rates for local calls are
   >    > about 15 cents for three minutes.  Downloading 100 or 200 megs over a
   >    > modem is not viable here.  So until France becomes one of the United
   >    > States of America :-) I vote against that.
   > 
   >    Ouch.  Anyway, I didn't intend for the user to download EVERYTHING that
   >    way, only certain software packages that they pick from a list.  Most of
   >    the ones they'd want will be included on the CD, but of course, there
   >    will be more, and we'll always work to make new things SEUL friendly and
   >    put them in "the list".
   > 
   > Upgrading from the net is a viable proposition at least for small
   > packages (Emacs, XFree, XEmacs are definitely out), but a half decent
   > Linux installation needs at least 200 Megs of software, that means 100
   > Megs once compressed.
   > 
   > Someone made a software for RedHat than will scan an FTP site and
   > upgrade automatically if it finds something newer than whet you have.
   > It could be hacked a bit for putting a limit on the size of the
   > paxkage.

   Not.

   There should be two pieces:

   1) a tool that retrieves packages from a server in an intelligent and
   simple way, and installs them.

   2) a tool that installs and configures packages.

   This way, no matter how the user gets the package (intranet, CD-ROM,
   etc.) it can be installed and configured without going through some
   convoluted "retrieve the package" process.

   Putting a limit on the size of a package would be patently foolish. It's
   not simple, it's not consistent, it's not complete. It's just a
   worthless restriction.

   Now if you mean that in order to aid automation, rules of size should be
   configurable, that's another matter entirely. But it's more complex than
   just setting a size ceiling; critical packages would be missed based on
   their size while smaller, less-useful, packages would be downloaded
   instead.

I was thinking in the phone bills of our user.  Think this: the
automata connects to your mirror site and sees a newer release of
XFree and XEmacs.  That means about 45 Megs.  Four hours connecting
time if it gets 3K/sec (it can be a lot lower).  That means 12$ here
in France.  And I assume than his ISP does not charge him for time.

And the day later because the packager fixed a small error the
automata will notice than for XFree and Xemacs have newer packages
this time with the same release but in a higher packaging version.
Add another 12$.

Our user could prefer to wait a few weeks and buy a CD: it is cheaper.
Specially because for most things our user does not need to be running
the very latest and greatest version.  About the only exceptions are
security holes and when his video card is unsupported by his current
XFree version.


The best would be to have a software REPORTING when it sees a newer
version than the one the user has installed.  And providing him with a
tool than would scan the report and prompt the user about upgrading.

-- 
			Jean Francois Martinez

==================== The Linux.  Use the Linux, Luke! =======================

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simple End User Linux Mailing list
To be removed from this mailing list send a message to majordomo@txcc.net
with the line
unsubscribe seul-project
in the body of the letter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------