Re: A proposal for a package management system
David W Studeman <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.ipcop.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
G.W. Haywood wrote: >>> Please can someone explain to me in simple terms exactly why the lack >>> of a built-in package management system is delaying the propagation of >>> IPCop updates by periods of the order of months? >> >> What makes you think so? > > The text quoted above my question. > >> Is this a complaint about the frequency of updates? > > No, this is a question about the quoted text (which appears to imply > that the lack of a package management system delays IPCop updates). > > For the record, I still have IPCop 1.4.21 (plus a few manual tweaks) > happily plugging away on about a dozen boxes; so it would indeed be > churlish of me to complain about the frequency of IPCop updates and > I am not doing any such thing. > >> What delays are you speaking of? ... > > It was Mr. Espinasse who spoke of delays. I'm just asking about that. > > -- > > 73, > Ged. > OK, noted, now I understand what you meant. Yes, it is still safe to use 1.4.21 as you well know. Some seem to be holding out for urlfilter. I admit I was rather spoiled by urlfilter. -- Dave Studeman http://www.raqcop.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2