Emails like the following, are what add to the confusion and misunderstanding about IPS, postinstall scripts, SMF-foo,etc, etc :-)
Danek Duvall wrote: > ... > > Yes, it's code: it can do *anything*. Nothing whatsoever can prevent that. > .... > > You just won't be able to do it in precisely the way you > used to, and you'll be constrained to doing it in only one well-defined > context, which should simplify life for the packager trying to construct a > well-behaving package. > So, in one paragraph, you say "it can do anything". in the next paragraph, you say "you'll be constrained". (without any details to "the folks out here" as to what kinds of "constraints" are involved here) Can you see my concern now? This is not the first time this sort of apparent contradiction has been written on the mailing list on this subject. Which is why it has been unclear. and why it is important to write it up in a standalone document describing all this stuff! When faced with reading "blog" info, etc. that is potentially a year old or whatever, vs reading something on this mailing list, that is presumed "current"... with no official "this is IPS and how it works" document, people tend to go with what they read here as the more accurate. Which unfortunately, may lead to more confusion. PS: > If it's not a reversible operation, then >> that fault lies with the packager. There is not neccessarily a "fault" of the packager. Some things are simply unavoidable. Such as the db data upgrade example I gave. Some non-reversible things must happen, to use a product at all. If the packaging system claims by default, "this install is completely reversible!", and gives no mechanism to the packager (auto-detected, or manually flaged, either way), to declare, "nope, this is not default; this install is NOT reversible", then that is a lacking in the packaging /system/. Even if you argue, "well, data migration should be handled in a separate script, and run separately by the site admin"; That action has just rendered the pkg install, non-reversible. Yet the IPS pkg infrastructure will presumably still claim, "sure, you can reverse this install!" I'd say avoiding false "this is reversible" claims, is an argument *in favour of* integrating data version upgrade scripts, with the packaging system. It should lead to more accurate reporting of whether non-reversible actions have been taken or not. _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
