I am moving this discussion to install-discuss. (Please remove opensolaris-discuss from any replies).
On 5/17/07, Bart Smaalders <bart.smaalders at sun.com> wrote: > Brian Gupta wrote: > > Going back to my initial motivation to get involved with OpenSolaris, > > and trying to find a common thread from conversations both within and > > without Opensolaris.org, it seems that the biggest area that needs > > addressing is the lack of a modern comprehensive packaging and > > distribution standard for OpenSolaris/Solaris. (This needs to be made > > a top priority) > > > > In order to do that we need a set of common goals, defining what we > > expect out of our modern packaging standard. I have started with a > > list below. Let's work from there and see if we can't all agree on > > what is ideal. > > > > * Must support vertical dependency trees (To ease in installation.) > > E.g. packaging tools should install transitive closure of > dependency graph. > > > * Dependencies must support the concept of X version or above. > > * Must support the concepts of bundles and horizontal > > dependencies. This is a concept where a group of packages > > need to be installed together, or not at all. > > * Must be as fine grained as possible > > this is irrespective of packaging system, aside from constraints > engendered by poor technology... > > > * Must support multiple versions of individual packages > this would need to be in separate locations, obviously. > > > * Must support uninstallation that will check and warn about all dependents > > > * Must support source packages. (With all dependency info, > > allowing an install or upgrade via source). > > Why? Does this make sense for large environments like a kernel? > Wouldn't it make more sense to point someone at an hg server? I think it does. Let me try and articulate why. 1) Packages can be delivered on media, you are suggesting baking in a dependency on a network service. 2) There is an expectation that source packages are supported. (outside the Solaris community) 3) ON and the kernel aren't really packaged as tightly as they could be. (Opinion) > Bart Smaalders Solaris Kernel Performance > barts at cyber.eng.sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/barts Also, I have noted many responses claim that the current packaging system supports everything I have listed. Clearly my understanding of what is included in the current packaging system is flawed. I am only aware of the following metadata: PKG Defines the package's name, abbreviation. It should be alphanumeric, no number as first character NAME Full name of the package. Provide a clear, concise and complete information about your package ARCH Describes what sort of architecture is associated with the package. Maxim 16 alphanumeric characters VERSION The version of the package. 256 max ASCII characters. Can not begin with left parenthesis CATEGORY Used to describe what it is the category of that package. Possible values: system or applications DESC Text that describes the package. Use a real description about this package PSTAMP The time/date when the package was released EMAIL The email address of the author of the package BASEDIR Defines where the software package will install, under what slice the package will go -Brian
