On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 05:35:04PM -0700, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> It told me the "entire" package had an update (BTW, I don't see the "UFIX"
> header documented in the man page, unless I missed it):
It's not. It stands for Upgradable, Frozen, Incorporated, and eXcluded.
Only the first is used so far.
> # pkg list -u
> NAME (AUTHORITY) VERSION STATE UFIX
> entire 0.5.11-0.86 installed u---
>
> However, after installing the update, nothing seemed to have changed.
Does it still consider itself upgradable?
> The package doesn't appear to have any contents:
>
> # pkg contents entire
> PATH
"pkg contents" by default only lists actions that have path attributes --
it's useful really only for packages that deliver files, which "entire"
doesn't -- it delivers only dependencies. "pkg contents -m" gives you the
raw view of the entire package, but you might prefer
pkg contents -o action.name,action.key entire
which will show a bunch of depend actions and the FMRIs
> And it seems to be some type of meta-package or cluster?
Yes. It's what we call an incorporation (or, at least, it's a rudimentary
version of the same). An incorporation is a package that contains
dependencies which constrain the forward (upgrade) movement of other
packages through their version space. For instance, an incorporation could
have a dependency on the build 86 versions of all packages (or at least all
those which could be associated with a "build 86"), and any attempt to
upgrade any of the packages mentioned in that incorporation would prevent
them from being upgraded to the build 87 versions.
The dependencies are optional -- that is, installing the incorporation
doesn't install the packages mentioned in the dependencies.
That's the idea, at any rate. They don't work fully yet, but the entire
incorporation does help limit some of the badness we were seeing in the
space between DP1 and the first release candidates.
> The packages "slim_cd" and "slim_install" seem to be the same.
These are actually more like metaclusters -- the dependencies are not
optional, and so all the packages they reference are brought in.
> What are these packages,
pkg info (or pkg info -r, if you don't have them installed) should tell
you that. Their descriptions are lacking, sadly.
> and how do you tell what dependencies they might bring in?
Same "pkg contents" incantation as above.
> If I want to customize the set of packages installed, should I just
> remove them?
You should be able to pkg install and pkg uninstall any packages you
choose. That slim_install is installed won't actually prevent you from
uninstalling the things it depends on. That's a bug in the general sense,
but it's also a bug that slim_install isn't an incorporation.
Danek
