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

Re: F10, VMware Server 2.0, and selinux



On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 12:14 -0500, Claude Jones wrote:
> On Mon December 15 2008 9:11:48 am Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> > > Another question came up in my mind this morning and I
> > > decided to go and check the above statement. For your
> > > information, there is an .rpm available for the latest
> > > VMServer 2.0 - I'm downloading it right now.
> >
> > For your information (and you would know this if you had
> > participated in the 2.0 betas), the RPM installer is being
> > officially depricated. In the betas, it was completely
> > disabled. Good luck installing it...
> 
> We seem to drifting towards a pissing match here, and it's not my 
> intention. If my tone seemed hyper-confrontational, it was 
> unintentional. I saw blanket statements being made that directly 
> contradicted my experience across many machines, without much 
> explanation. You then got annoyed and accused me of the same sin 
> in reverse ("it works for me, so...") - an attitude I actually 
> tend to detest when I see it - my point was that it was not right 
> to make blanket statements on the subject, that clearly 
> contradicted my experience in the matter and the evidence I've 
> seen on this list repeatedly, where people have posted solutions 
> to issues with running VMWare on Fedora - implying that they were 
> successfully doing so, at least as I saw it.

Agreed - let's bury the hatchet on this. My "testiness" wasn't directed
at you to begin with.

> So far as the Ver 2 statement above, note how I phrased it - I 
> was very careful about what I said; if VMWare rpms are indeed 
> being deprecated, why are they continuing to offer the download? 
> Are you saying it won't install if I try to run the .rpm?

No. What I'm saying is that the RPM versions are going away, probably
after this next release or so. VMware wants to move to a common
installer between Debian and RPM (and others) based distros. My own
philosophical issue with this decision is, allegorically speaking, their
solution to dealing with 3 different package installation methods has
been (unfortunately) to add a fourth.

That said, the .bundle installer works pretty well and automates lots of
things, but it violates the sanctity of the built-in package management
tools. That's not a very good thing to do in an RPM (or Debian) based
distro.

During the 2.0 betas, they all but scuttled the RPMs because they wanted
people to start using the .bundle installer. So it still should work for
now, but you should plan for that the .bundle installer will be the way
forward in the future.

I'm holding out that future capabilities in Package Kit might help
alleviate this. We'll see...

Cheers,

Chris

--
======================
Warning:  You are logged into reality as the root user...

--Unknown




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