Mark Logan wrote:
> James Carlson wrote:
>> Garrett D'Amore writes:
>>
>>> I don't know about savings of effort, but if we're not making them
>>> public interfaces, then I prefer them in /usr/lib/parted, where folks
>>> are less likely to find them by "accident" and infer (possibly false)
>>> things about their suitability for public use.
>>>
>>> That said, I'd hope that if we ever shipped the public ones, that this
>>> project could be converted to use the public ones instead of keeping its
>>> own private copies.
>>>
>>
>> There are some questions behind what I'm asking. If these are hacked
>> versions of those utilities, then I'd like to understand how we will
>> deal with the 1991/061 rules. If they're not hacked, then I'm a
>> little puzzled on why they're buried. It's not as if this project
>> team appears to want to promise a great deal of stability for parted
>> itself (they're saying "Volatile," so it can't be used easily within
>> the installer), so I don't understand drawing the "support" line at
>> parted itself and excepting away ntfsprogs. What support?
>>
>>
>
> I only buried ntfsprogs because I thought it would be easier to make
> it through PSARC that way. I guess I miscalculated. I did not hack
> ntfsprogs at all, it was the easiest thing to port. I have no problem
> delivering ntfsprogs in its entirety and in /usr/bin, if that is the
> consensus.
Okay, that would be better if you're game. It does non-trivially expand
the scope of this case though. May I instead recommend you submit a
case for just ntfsprogs, and make this one a dependent of it?
>
> Also maybe I need to rethink the Volatile stability. I wrongly assumed
> that FOSS had to be Volatile. Also the goal is to get the OpenSolaris
> installer to use either Parted or GParted, their choice, so I need to
> choose the correct stability to achieve that.
Uncommitted is probably better. Or, you wind up needing a contract.
Nobody can meaningfully import a Volatile interface.
- Garrett
