Danek Duvall wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 03:56:19PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > >> blastwave does not currently have a twiki package. This comes to mind, >> because of my recently having to deal with a similar software installation, >> by hand, and thinking "wouldnt it be nice if I didnt have to do this by >> hand, but I just had a package to do it for me". > > Do you really want the package to do it for you, or do you just want the > thing to work by the time you get to start using the software? > > If it's the latter, then why does it matter if the package does the work or > if the software does it when it realizes that it needs to be done (either > by being told, by looking for itself, or by starting up for the first time > after install/upgrade)? >
it is unclear what you mean by "the software". It seems like you are implying "the software (ie: twiki)". But, discussing how I might like twiki to be better software, seems to be out of scope for a discussion on "how a packaging system should work". The reality is, as some pundit wrote, "Software sucks. Some software sucks less". The challenge for a packager, is to compensate for this. To answer your question, as best I understand it: If there were a twiki package, I would expect "pkg-get install twiki" to result in a fully operational twiki base install, when it was done running. Similarly, I would expect "pkg-get upgrade twiki" to result in an upgraded, and once more fully running, installation of twiki, if it were possible. if twiki itself does not "magically" make that happen, then I would expect the package of twiki, to make it happen insofar as it was possible, or it would be a poor package. if it was possible at a "it could be scripted" level, but the packaging system got in the way of that happening, then it would be a poor packaging system. It SOUNDS like, from what has been said recently, that this [shunt to SMF] approach, might make it possible. I'm still waiting, however, for someone to explicitly confirm, "yes, the stuff shunted over to SMF, will be able to do ANYTHING, with no restrictions". This has not been explicitly stated. it would be reassuring to see it explicitly stated. It would be even nicer to see an explicit writeup of what it can and cant do, and what it would roughly look like, on some kind of document in www.opensolaris.org, for example. _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
