>> 3) All subpackages (-devel, -docs, ...) will have only 1 dependency -
>> parent package. This makes a bit strange order of installing
>> packages, but I want to somehow mark package that is sub-package.
>> Cause it doesn't make sense to have sdl-devel without main sdl
>> package...
>>
>
> The way we'd intended to do these was to dump everything into a single
> package, tag files appropriately, and use filters to install selectively.
> That is,
>
> file path=usr/lib/libsdl.so.1
> file path=usr/lib/libsdl.so devel=true
> directory path=usr/include/sdl devel=true
> file path=usr/include/sdl/sdl.h devel=true
> file path=usr/man/man3/libsdl.3 docs=true
>
> etc. Locale-specific packages would be handled similarly, but there you'd
> have a "locale" tag which would specify the locale a particular file
> belonged to.
>
How does this approach relate to the situation where we will have a
transportable disk image format for IPS packages? Will we only have fat
packages in disk image form? If not, will a person handling the disk
image form of a package readily understand the general type of content
contained in the disk image? Does the representation of what is in a
particular disk image form of an IPS package depend on how the file is
named?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/desktop-discuss/attachments/20071019/e47202c3/attachment.html>
