Ethan Quach wrote: > > > Jean McCormack wrote: >> Glenn Lagasse wrote: >>> >>> My point is that SUNWfirefox is going to be installed off the liveCD. >>> Why would we then want to pull it from IPS because it's part of a >>> collection as well? Are we somehow going to have logic that says >>> "SUNWfirefox is already going to be installed because it's part of the >>> liveCD load so don't pull it from IPS even though it's specified in the >>> Development collection"? That seems unweildy to me. Keeping track of >>> what's provided on the liveCD vs having to be pulled from IPS seems >>> untenable long term imo. >>> >>> I suppose we could just not care about duplicate package installation >>> (once from liveCD and then again via a collection and IPS) but I wonder >>> if we might not run in to problems down the road. For instance, what >>> happens if a liveCD specific customization is done to a package during >>> image creation which is then overwritten because the package is >>> 're-installed' from IPS as part of a collection? Somewhat hypothetical >>> but illustrates my point. >>> >> I see your concern. Of course we do have that problem now. If we do a >> live >> CD customization and later the person does an update, the package >> will get overwritten. >> >> As for overwriting, it will only get overwritten if the IPS download >> is a later rev than >> the liveCD version. Otherwise IPS knows not to update the package, >> correct? Of course that >> could very well happen. > > Even if that software package defined in the collection > is a later rev that what was cpio'ed over from the liveCD, > installing that collection should still follow pkg's policy. > Installing that collection ultimately leads to said software > package being "updated" on the installed system. Files > that have been customized (e.g. /etc/app.conf) don't get > overwritten via an update. > > Having said that, it wasn't clear to me in your original > posting that we would be allowing both cpio install and > collection selection simultaneously. Our chat with Glynn > resulted in that this wasn't explicitly a requirement; > providing a choice of either was sufficient. Have we > decided otherwise? Part of this discussion is to make a definite decision. Discussion with both Ginnie and Sanjay led to the "install the liveCD bits in the normal (cpio) way and then customize using IPS" proposal. This allows a base set of bits to be installed quickly and yet the user can also customize their software.
Jean > > > -ethan >
