On Fri, 16 May 2008, Danek Duvall wrote: > It's not. It stands for Upgradable, Frozen, Incorporated, and eXcluded. > Only the first is used so far.
Ah, ok. I figured out the upgradable, I won't trouble you about the rest until they are actually implemented :). > > However, after installing the update, nothing seemed to have changed. > > Does it still consider itself upgradable? No, that did indeed change, but nothing tangible seems to have happened other than the "entire" package has a slightly newer version number and no longer lists an upgrade available. It's just not clear what that upgrade was intended for or accomplished. > pkg contents -o action.name,action.key entire > > which will show a bunch of depend actions and the FMRIs Indeed, that is considerably more informative. > 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. So, hypothetically, if you have the 05/08 "entire" incorporation installed, when 11/08 openSolaris packages show up in the repository, they won't show up in the potential upgrade list? And you would need to explicitly install the new 11/08 "entire" incorporation to upgrade to them? So rather than hundreds of potential packages showing up in the upgrade list, you will just see the one possible upgrade to "entire", and if you don't install it only minor updates to the existing 05/08 packages would be available. I think I understand it. > The dependencies are optional -- that is, installing the incorporation > doesn't install the packages mentioned in the dependencies. So in a future openSolaris installer, the "entire" package would be installed to define the revision level of the release, as well as whichever specific clusters or packages you picked? > > 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. "slim_install" does seem to only contain dependencies, but "slim_cd" has no dependencies listed, just a handful of files: ACTION.NAME ACTION.KEY file etc/X11/gdm/custom.conf file etc/pam.conf file etc/passwd file etc/shadow file etc/user_attr legacy SUNWfixes set fmri set authority It looks like it is more relevant to the live CD distribution than the operating system once it has been installed? I'm guessing the etc/passwd and etc/shadow files included in the package define the "jack" user. > pkg info (or pkg info -r, if you don't have them installed) should tell > you that. Their descriptions are lacking, sadly. Yes, "Summary: entire incorporation" wasn't particularly enlightening :). > 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. So from an abstract point of view, even though the dependencies are not enforced, it seems it would be better to remove the slim_install package if you're going to move any of the packages depended by it. Thanks for the explanation, I'm sorry for the torrent of questions I've been posting this week. I'm trying to wrap my head around this and see if it will be workable for our production ZFS file server we're going to deploy soon. -- Paul B. Henson | (909) 979-6361 | http://www.csupomona.edu/~henson/ Operating Systems and Network Analyst | henson at csupomona.edu California State Polytechnic University | Pomona CA 91768
