Re: [p2-dev] Re: Shared installs and our EPP Packages
I came to a similar conclusion. Though I'm not sure it is easy to draw the distinction. After all when I'm on my own linux install, why would it be any different than when I'm on windows? I should be able to update to be elevated to a super user and install the new version of eclipse.
On 2010-08-19, at 3:26 AM, Gunnar Wagenknecht wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> Am 12.08.2010 15:32, schrieb Ian Bull:
>> 1. The definition of 'shared' installs. If each user could update the
>> base then this is not really 'shared' anymore. Some users have SR1,
>> some have SR2, etc...
> I started thinking more about this and I'm tending to say that Windows
> is *not* a shared install in terms of the original definition on
> Unix/Linux. I think there are different kinds of "shared" installs now.
> A) not really shared
> A user installs something into a protected area. During installation the
> user gained higher privileges (either automatically or on purpose). But
> generally the user is the owner of the system and is the exclusive user
> of the install.
> In essence only the installation location is write protected. A user may
> not even be aware of this (UAC).
> B) really shared
> An administrator installs something into a shared location to be used by
> multiple users.
> Case B clearly is a shared install. However, case A is different. That's
> the Windows 7 case (IMHO). I think it's wrong to treat it the same as
> case B.
>> 2. Consistency. If a users updates some bundles in the shared area, and
>> then the admin updates the base, what should we use now?
> This clearly applies to B but not to A. In case A user == admin,
> however, the user might not even be aware of this.
> I think p2 needs different strategies for case A and B and a smart
> decision when selecting a strategy.
> Gunnar Wagenknecht
> p2-dev mailing list