Hi Alan, Alan Coopersmith píše v po 06. 12. 2010 v 10:21 -0800: > Milan Jurik wrote: > > - is it acceptable solution to keep SUNWbipr tag in network/ftp and > > move SUNWbip tak to network/ping (I believe "Basic IP commands" matches > > ping binary more than ftp client? What is really expected from this > > legacy tags? > > There should be mail in the pkg-discuss archives from early this year from > when I tackled the X consolidation package refactoring (which delivered into > snv_144, so look a month or two before that). > > The solution we agreed upon for packages upon which existing SVR4 packages > may depend (since that's really what legacy package actions are for - > satisfying > dependencies for SVR4 packages), was to create new "compatibility" packages > which deliver just the legacy action and depend actions pointing to the IPS > packages needed to make up the content of the old SVR4 package. > > For example: > http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/x-cons/xnv-clone/pkg/manifests/compatibility-packages-SUNWxwinc.mf > http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/x-cons/xnv-clone/pkg/manifests/compatibility-packages-SUNWxwopt.mf > http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/x-cons/xnv-clone/pkg/manifests/compatibility-packages-SUNWxwplt.mf >
thank you a lot, this looks like nice solution. I think I will use this way, I will introduce compatibility/packages/SUNWbip (and keep legacy tag SUNWbipr in network/ftp because it is valid). Best regards, Milan _______________________________________________ on-ips-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/on-ips-dev
