boaz at hishome.net
Tue Sep 28 10:30:51 CDT 2004
Mike Hearn wrote:
> Wouldn't it be better to do good testing and have, ooh, I don't know,
> a beta testing program? In other words, to ensure we *don't* mangle
> the users data?
Yep that too.
> I'm not sure we should design this system on the assumption that we
> suck and will probably blow things up. I don't know of any other
> programs that use such a mechanism when upgrading!
I am not saying that. I'm Just saying. Give me the --noupgrade
potability. for checking out stuff. Some programs cannot survive side by
side with multiple versions of them selfs. And the Installer will remove
the old version. Those who do. take measures to protect users. Even new
version of WORD will prompts you when you try to save an old version file.
If wine was installed from rpm and is updated - it is one case. The old
version is gone the new one is replacing it. But if the old version is
still alive. The new one should not take hold. In my opinion you should
have the upgrade option in wineprefixcreate by all means. Than it is the
packager/Installer responsibility to run it when appropriate. But it
should not be left to wine-run to decide, unless you keep some kind of
reference count on installations which is hard and complicated.
Any way sorry for this flame . I Just wanted for you to see the commonly
used scenario of 2 version running side by side and to let us geeks have
that possibility in the future. The Upgrade option is commendable and
highly needed, Just not automatically, for me.
More information about the wine-devel