On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 08:11:48PM +0200, a b wrote: > Consider that if I deliver my software in /usr (as a 3rd party > unbundled applications vendor), I run an extremely high risk of: > > a) being overwritten by IPS, respectively your own updates > > b) my software overwriting your software.
I agree. This has to be avoided. That does not mean that there's no way to enable third-party delivery into /usr (see my other reply). > > Death to /opt/sfw, /usr/sfw, etc. > > It appears that these architectural issue have not been thought throughly. PSARC certainly has discussed these issues at length. This is the first I hear that where third-party software goes is different for Nevada than for OpenSolaris. And I'm not sure that that's anything other than Shawn's opinion -- documentation is needed. > > See above. Your last alternative is to contribute the work to fix > > isaexec. I think you'll find that many engineers feel that it has > > several design issues, such as the one you've discovered, that need to > > be resolved. > > I very well might, but fixing isaexec(3C) is not going to fix "a no > scripting zone" issue, nor will it fix the architectural issues I > described above. Different issue. > "Indiana" has a problem. And not just any problem, it has several > serious architectural issues, and those are the worst kind of > problems. I cannot simply solve these architectural issues with just > code. Some consideration is needed as well, and not just on my part. I'm not sure I agree because I'm not sure that what Shawn said about /opt is anything other than personal opinion. IMO if IPS can deal sanely with conflicts, and preferably a registry is provided, then recommending /usr over /opt may be a good idea, but deprecating /opt wouldn't be a good idea for a long time yet. _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
