Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 12:13:41PM -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
>   
>> As I wrote in another post. Please don't put anything OSS in /usr/bin.
>>     
>
> Er, there's plenty of non-Sun originated OSS in /usr/bin already. 

I know. Perl already causes me tons of problems. Can't not install it 
either since so many Sun originated parts of Solaris depend on the perl 
that Solaris uses now. It's a royal pain!

Can't uninstall large portions of GNOME either without removing other 
parts of Solaris that now depend on it too. Ditto with Apache. (I even 
have this problem with Java - It updates much more often than Solaris, 
and the one in /usr/bin is usually out of date compared to what I have 
available on my network.)

When this GNU tool chain is available in /usr/bin on Solaris, What is 
going to stop Sun-original development from depending on it?

If I will always be free to decide to not install the packages that 
contain these GNU tools (not because I don't like the tools, but because 
I have another more up to date, and easier to maintain method of 
providing them to my customers,) then I have less objections to this. 
But given the examples of Perl and Apache, I see a future where key 
parts of Solaris that I won't want to do without relying on these GNU 
tools, and I'll be forced to install them.

>  And
> OpenSolaris *is* OSS, so much of /usr/bin is OSS.
>
> So, I don't understand this comment.
>
>   
If this change is just for OpenSolaris then I might have less of a 
problem with it. If Sun Solaris is always an  alternative for me to use 
instead. But if it's a change to both then I stick to my points for why 
this is a bad idea.
Why other solutions would achieve the same goals (or nearly the same) 
and not eliminate the possibilities for people who have other ways of 
providing this functionality.

It's always seemed to me that Solaris had a more 'network' view of 
things. The defaults were manytimes setup to make it easier to use 
single accounts across multiple machines (default home automount map for 
example.)

On the other hand Linux, from it's home-user, single, remote hobby based 
developer roots has had a more 'everything installed on a single 
machine' mentality.

I think having solaris include all this stuff by default *in a place 
that is hard to avoid* is a mistake.
If it was easy to avoid it at user level then I'd have no argument.

> The only reasonable distinction w.r.t. what goes into /usr/bin is
> interface stability and/or Sun support for it.  And the ARC already
> decided that serendipitous discovery of unstable interfaces is now OK.
>
> That matter being closed I see no reason not to put 4,000 new things
> into /usr/bin, and I expect the ARC would agree.
>
>   
Like I said. I didn't think I'd have much say here. Just wanted to be heard.

 -Kyle



Reply via email to