Doug Scott wrote, On 03/07/07 04:54: > Alvaro Lopez Ortega wrote: >> Peter Tribble wrote, On 02/07/07 20:44: >> >> > One thing that hasn't been addressed is whether Indiana can >> > use the SUNW package prefix in the first place? >> >> I suppose that it would be fine as long as they are compatible [1]. >> In fact, I would encourage it for the sake of compatibility. >> >> 1.- So the new question would be, how to ensure they are compatible. >> > I think Peter was asking whether Sun would (or can) allow OpenSolaris to > use SUNW as this always has been used to tag a package as part of a Sun > product. Another question is will there be a 1-1 mapping between current > Solaris packages and Indiana packages? i.e. Indiana could break some of > the larger packages into smaller packages to give the end user more > choice of what is installed on their system.
My understanding if that, if there isn't a *very important reason* for breaking compatibility, we should definitely going for remaining compatible. There is something that has surprise me in this community: It underestimate compatibility, and I can't still figure out the reason. That is one of the huge problems of Linux. We should have learned the lesson. -- Greetings, alo. _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
