Hi Jeff, Bayard, Bayard - nice review points!
On 3 Oct 2011, at 18:06, Bayard G. Bell wrote: <snip> > 2) is there any basis for thinking that bdb should only be built for > 32-bit support, or would we reasonably expect that 64-bit binaries would > need to link against it? For a library like bdb, we should ship 64bit binaries/libraries. > 3) it looks like the default behaviour for library link generation is to > create links that look like lib<name>-<version>.so rather than > lib<name>.so.<version>; which convention is expected for OI? I'm not sure we should adjust the software vendor's defaults - and usually these are generated by libtool (I think!). But, the exception I'd say if other distros adjust the name, then we probably should too. > 4) a lot of the content appears to be documentation; have you confirmed > that all of it is correctly tagged with the doc facet? Good catch. <snip> > 6) given the prevalence of bdb and how low it tends to be in the stack, > might we also consider providing debug support? are there any standing > rules on how that should be done? No rules on debug support as far as I know. There might be some funky pkg5 way of delivering debug vs non-debug binaries but I'd have to look that up. I think it could be omitted on a first pass and added later if desired. Cheers, Alasdair _______________________________________________ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev