View Single Post
Posts: 3,319 | Thanked: 5,610 times | Joined on Aug 2008 @ Finland
#250
Originally Posted by zimon View Post
Package dependency hell problems like these?
That particular problem is a repository issue, caused by the disrepancy between the SDK and device firmwares. RPM would have *exactly* the same problem.

is flawed and outdated badly. We can notice it daily on talk.maemo.org with instrcutions to download this and that manually (not even from HTTPS-servers) and then blindly installing deb-packages with dpkg -i without GPG-signatures.
For that reason only move from DEB- to RPM-system would be well justified already, also on Debian-PC-distributions.
You cannot enforce security on people who don't want it. Most of the people on tmo don't care if it's RPM, DEB, signed or unsigned, they want to install. If you create obstacles, they will simply go around it (install binaries manually, etc). We've been over this, but it's about policies, not formats. If people don't accept/follow the policies (which they clearly don't), what format is being worked around is completely irrelevant.
__________________
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to attila77 For This Useful Post: