On 1/5/07, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> exactly which needed features are those that rpm has > that pkgadd does not ?
...
There are principally several major features `pkgadd` is lacking, and those are: if I need REV 1.0 or 2007.01.05.07 of some dependency, and I have REV 3.2 or 2007.04.18.23 of the said software, `pkgadd` should be able to recognize that I have satisfied the min REV required, and plough on instead of doing a string-like check and *insisting* that I need *exactly* REV 1.0 (or 2007.01.05.07, for example).
I can't see that working. You have no idea whatsoever whether a later version will be compatible with the minimum version, and even if one later version is compatible then subsequent later versions may not be. If you want to do something like this then surely the right place would be for REV 3.2 to declare that it also provides REV 1.0. That way when REV 4.3 that is an incompatible version of that dependency is released, you don't get shafted. For example, on SGI's IRIX, `inst` is smart enough to note the difference
between two same "subsystems" of a different revision: if a newer subsystem *does not* have files that the old one does, the now unnecessary files will be automatically and transparently removed by `inst`. This is an upgrade feature of `inst` that I find simply and without any doubt phenomenal!!!
Ermmm. In what way is this different from pkgrm of the old version followed by pkgadd of the new version? (There is room for a one-step implementation, especially as that would allow you to do this safely in the case where other packages depended on the package you want to update.) Both of the aforementioned issues and scenarios is where `inst` excells. I
have never worked with a UNIX/Linux software management subsystem as elegant and as intelligent as `inst`!
If there's one way in which I've been fortunate recently, it's that I no longer have to deal with the monstrosity that is inst. Anything that can get so tangled up that it cannot allow you to install some software because of irreconcilable dependencies is something I'm glad to be rid of. (Although I have seen rpm based machines go into the same abyss.) -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
