On 02/07/07, Daniel Griffith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/26/07, Alberto Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If we are seriously thinking about making solaris more appealing to linux
> (and any) users, we should seriosly rethink the way we name packages. For
> me, any of those package names means absolutely nothing (I know SUNW because
> I like stock market issues, but I think this SUNW thing is also redundant
> and meaningless for most people).
+1
On 6/27/07, Alvaro Lopez Ortega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's true that the SUNW isn't really meaningful, and that usually
> package names are quite cryptic.
>
> However, it is very important to remain compatible with all the
> Solaris software out there. And of course, ISVs wouldn't be happy if
> we change all the package names over night.
>
> Besides, with a decent installation utility, you wouldn't even need
> to know the name of the package. It can use the standard names
> internally, but that doesn't mean that you'd have to deal with them.
I don't think that is much of a solution, and the current packages ARE
one of the things that need to be swept away for Indiana to be
acceptable to Linux users like me - that's a hack and not something
that should be used in a new distribution.
You need a convincing argument for sweeping them away. There is
nothing stopping the packages from having full descriptions or
alternate names.
Seperating package names and package file names is a ghastly solution
to the problem, if I want to manually download a package called
nvidia-drivers, I should be downloading a file called
nvidia-drivers.***, not NVDAgraphics.***.
Why does that matter?
I'm getting worried as I was hoping that from the first posts on this
list that Indiana could take advantage of the mistakes and lessons
learnt from Linux in the past 10 years, but it looks like it is going
to be seriously hamstrung by compatibility to Solaris.
How was it a mistake? Hamstrung how? In what way?
What I'd love is GNU userland on the Solaris kernel, though I can
Then let me introduce you to Nexenta:
http://www.gnusolaris.org/
I've just spent 3 weeks using Solaris Express for the first time (and
hated every minute of it) and if opensolaris is just that with a
package manager and ZFS boot I really doubt I'll be using it (it would
be easier to use ZFS with FreeBSD) - some effort needs to go into
looking into _why_ using Solaris is such a turn off to people used to
modern Linux distributions rather than arguing about what WM should be
bundled or what the distribution should be called...
If you read over the past discussions or even the problem statements,
you would realise that the project's goals are more than just to
repackage software in a different manner.
--
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. " --Donald Knuth
_______________________________________________
indiana-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
