Re: Installation requirements
Re: Installation requirements
- Subject: Re: Installation requirements
- From: Bill Coderre <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 17:16:59 -0700
On Mar 9, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Greg Neagle <email@hidden> wrote:
> The fact that some packages are poorly written and work only on the boot volume should not obscure the fact that installation packages can and should when possible be authored to allow installation on any eligible volume.
Some developers adopt this (install on non-boot volume) flexibility. It is a valid philosophy, and (I believe) well-supported by Apple's installer.
My opinion is that it's not a good idea for the typical PRODUCT installers, because it's more likely to cause confusion than provide benefit. (What if the app requires 10.8, and the system has 10.8 booted, but the user selects a volume containing 10.6? Should installation be allowed? One can argue either way, and the arguments are, in my opinion, too complex to explicate in an error sheet.)
On the other hand, for the kind of giganto multi-product installer for deploying "everything" onto a company-issued laptop, that flexibility is required, and it's probably worth the work to add the extra install logic, instead of just trusting the admin.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Installer-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden