[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Package Management Blows Goats (use cases)



On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 11:29 -0400, Horst H. von Brand wrote:
> What about computer labs (or other places) where "user installs random
> software" is *not* wellcome? What about packages that require sysadmin
> configuration (define local configuration, start server, ...)?

Sure, as I've pointed out before this is all fine-grained policy that an
admin can set per user or per machine.

> > Installing files automatically
> > 
> > Simon wants to borrow the computer while Suzanne waits for OpenOffice to
> > download. He uses fast-user switching to switch to a new login. He
> > notices the same downloading icon in his session which indicates
> > Suzannes' download is still in progress. He starts Pidgin which then
> > crashes. The bug-buddy window appears which prompts him to install the
> > debuginfo so a valid backtrace can be detected. He clicks yes, and a
> > libnotify windows appears telling Simon that the request has been queued
> > and that he will be notified when the debuginfo has been installed. When
> > installed, the bug-buddy helper continues and submits a valid bug.
> 
> This is /not/ "installing automatically", it is another user installing
> new stuff while another install is running. Now you need to distinguish
> between users that are allowed to install stuff and those that aren't
> allowed to do so.

Sure, I don't see that a problem.

> A similar case is that Suzanne gets bored waiting for OOo, and asks for
> a (smallish) game to kill time.
> 
> Again, what about situations where installing random stuff should not be
> allowed?

Lock it down using system policy...

> All the above presuposes a /huge/ bandwidth to the 'net (or at least to
> a nearby mirror). Plus nearly unlimited disk space (yes, the sum total
> of what the users will end up installing by just random twiddling /is/
> everything). Not my case, unfortuntely. And I suspect that is the case
> of lots of Fedora users.

My home desktop system gets a new package a month installed. This
use-case isn't spec'ed for the enterprise, but that's configurable to
make it valid.

> sudo + a configuration that allows running "yum install foo" or "yumex"
> for assorted users is almost enough for all of the above, plus gives
> some extra control. I don't see a burning need for any of this, to tell
> the truth.

Sure, I can understand that point of view too. I would also like you to
show my non-techy girlfriend how to use yum or yumex when all she wants
to do is open a odf file. :-)

Richard.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]