OpenPKG CVS Repository
http://cvs.openpkg.org/
____________________________________________________________________________
Server: cvs.openpkg.org Name: Thomas Lotterer
Root: /e/openpkg/cvs Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Module: openpkg-re Date: 03-Feb-2004 10:15:10
Branch: HEAD Handle: 2004020309151000
Modified files:
openpkg-re todo.txt
Log:
shift priorities
Summary:
Revision Changes Path
1.170 +46 -5 openpkg-re/todo.txt
____________________________________________________________________________
patch -p0 <<'@@ .'
Index: openpkg-re/todo.txt
============================================================================
$ cvs diff -u -r1.169 -r1.170 todo.txt
--- openpkg-re/todo.txt 2 Feb 2004 09:44:58 -0000 1.169
+++ openpkg-re/todo.txt 3 Feb 2004 09:15:10 -0000 1.170
@@ -40,18 +40,17 @@
o fix bootstrap %pre problem [rse]
buildfarm reports "install: %pre scriptlet failed (2), skipping openpkg ..."
(currently does no longer occur?)
- o openpkg.boot does not find rpmtool through macro while bootstrapping [rse]
o companion release GNU shtool 2.0.0 [rse] thl: sh.* docs done
o check rpm 1.3/2.0 package cross signing and verification [thl]
o make sure openpkg-2.0.0-2.0.0 provides: openpkg-20040113-20040113
o decide whether *-2.0.0.(src.)rpm should require: openpkg-2.0.0-2.0.0 or not
and why (not)
o info.dir (Debian v3.1), /override/bin, wrappers for cp|mv|rm|chmod|chown|chgrp
o fix all CORE and BASE packages
-
http://www.openpkg.org/status-log.cgi/aide-0.9-20030724.log.dv16.ix86-solaris10-re [ms]
- checking for unsigned short... yes
- checking size of unsigned short... configure: error: cannot compute sizeof
(unsigned short)
SHOULD HAVE:
+ o <compat> not <loc>
+ o use UUID for COOKIE header
+ o openpkg.boot does not find rpmtool through macro while bootstrapping [rse]
o fix all PLUS packages that existed in OpenPKG 1.3; downgrade to EVAL/JUNK as
a last resort [ms]
o Version: %{release} deploy: problems! -> openpkg build! Release: %{version}
XX, Version: %(rpm -q --qf '%release' *.spec)) [thl]
o rse: simplify options (for tools, etc):
@@ -72,7 +71,7 @@
- thl: basic set of meta-xxx packages
o fix all PLUS packages or downgrade to EVAL/JUNK [ms]
o fix EVAL/JUNK packages and elevate to PLUS [ms]
- - rse: OpenPKG instance management autit log: added/removed/upgraded packages
+ - rse: OpenPKG instance management audit log: added/removed/upgraded packages
- rse: RPM extension: fetch/curl replacement (OSSP fetch)
- thl: news.txt replaced by news.cgi which uses pre-scanned information
- rse: architecture/platform independent packages (BuildArch: noarch, aber
BuildOS: any existing nicht)
@@ -84,6 +83,48 @@
- openpkg-dev creates /// in nosrc pathnames
- rc should check whether it needs *and* can use su to avoid nightly error
mails from
cron in instances that were installed non-root (s_usr != root)
+ - boostrap should remember things from install time, i.e. did it
+ create users? This is needed to decide whether or not the users
+ must be erased on uninstall.
+
+ REJECTED SCOPE CREEP (but needs to be discussed post release)
+
+ o more accurate version.release requirements (Christoph supported by Thomas)
+
+ currently all release packages require other packages unversioned,
+ i.e. the relationship of application A requiing library L is
+ formulated as
+
+ A requires L
+
+ This is good as long as the user stays within a release. However,
+ when the user starts to mix in CURRENT or is in the progress of
+ doing an UPGRADE it would be favourable when the requirement is
+ formulated:
+
+ A requires L >= V.V.V-R.R.R
+ A requires L >= *-R.R.R
+
+ This would ensure L is upgraded before A, something we cannot
+ assure today. The first form doesn't work for mixing in CURRENT
+ beyond the first vendor upgrade. It also doesn't work for doing
+ an UPGRADE assumed the later release also contains a later vendor
+ version. The second form doesn't work because RPM doesn't support
+ it.
+
+ A possible workaround was identified to omit the vendor version:
+
+ A requires L >= L.release.R.R.R and
+ L-V.V.V-R.R.R provides L.release.R.R.R
+
+ This means that every application A and every library L needs
+ to have this information added. This is a maintenance nightmare
+ and, if done manually, considered being a very error prone task.
+ Ralf tried to automate it using macros but failed because the
+ macro did only get information from the last requirement entry
+ not all entries and conditional entries seem to be a even harder
+ challenge. So we stick to what we had in the past and this is
+ deferred due to time constraints.
OpenPKG 2.1 Development
-----------------------
@@ .
______________________________________________________________________
The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org
CVS Repository Commit List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
