Tim Knitter wrote: > > > Bart Smaalders wrote: >> Tim Knitter wrote: >>> Bart and all, >>> >>> I just fixed 1981 (not yet integrated) in the IPS gate and it >>> requires 1179 in the slim gate. If the fix for 1179 doesn't >> > exist on the system and the fix for 1981 does, then any failed pkg >> > install/uninstall operation will fail to create a clone of the image. >> > I'm wondering how best to handle this dependency for opensolaris. Can >> > both the SUNWipkg and SUNWinstall-libs be updated at the same time? >> > If so is there a mechanism in place to do it? >> >> I'm confused (as usual). Today, pkg install/uninstall doesn't create >> a clone. Do you mean pkg update-image? >> > > pkg install/uninstall creates a clone in the event of a failed operation > on the live image. See > src/modules/client/bootenv.py:restore_install_uninstall(). Actually that > is orthogonal to the main issue of the dependency that 1981 will have on > libbe, if integrated. And I suspect this won't be the first fix that > will impose a pkg -> libbe dependency since libbe and pkg are in bed > with one another now. ;-) The question is, how can we resolve this > dependency going forward without breaking pkg(1)? Always deliver > SUNWinstall-libs and SUNWipkg together? Then there is the issue before > an opensolaris release or update. A system could have newer pkg bits > then libbe bits. Probably a secondary issue resolved by installing the > latest SUNWinstall-libs pkg but could pose issues for developers.
Ok - What else uses libbe? - Bart -- Bart Smaalders Solaris Kernel Performance [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.sun.com/barts "You will contribute more with mercurial than with thunderbird." _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
