Danek Duvall wrote: > On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 11:07:56PM -0700, Joseph Di Pol wrote: > >> Stephen Hahn wrote: >> >>> - tools master A creates user image with stack 1.0 >>> >>> - tools master A gets menu items? >> Yes! And he is thrilled. Especially since he not only gets >> menu items, but a toolbar notification when new updates are >> available for that user image he is managing. >> >>> - developer B, already working on that system, gets menu items? >> Sadly, no. Not in my use case. This would require some additional >> steps by the user. > > But this is something you'd like to see?
It isn't something we expected to see -- so I can't say I've thought this case through. > >>> - developer C joins company, is told to use stack 1.0 provided by >>> tools master A >>> >>> - developer C gets menu items how? >> Same case as B. > > Ditto for this? > > We've talked about having user images be "linked" to the full image they're > part of. I could see that linkage involving putting some system > integration bits outside the image, assuming full permissions. It almost > feels like relocatable vs absolute paths in SVr4 packages. This seems useful, but it still doesn't address those platforms that don't support integration by dropping in a file -- like older versions of Gnome where you need to run some code to do the integration. > Another thing to think about is that if the goal is to have a package > install into someone's home directory and install files in .gnome to do > gnome integration, the package will look quite different than if the goal > is to install it into a system directory, or a user image not associated > with a home directory (which is not a distinction we have at the moment, > but seems like it would be the norm for anyone doing multi-install). > Perhaps this is solved by tagging files appropriately, and filtering on > image type ... Yes -- plus some concept of BASEDIR supported too (to handle the case where installing into the OS image you want /usr/appserver, but installing into a user image you want $IMAGE_HOME/appserver -- no 'usr'). For now there may need to be different packages for software that is integrated into an OpenSolaris repository (optimized for a system image) versus an "unbundled" software repository (optimized for a user image). Joe > > Danek _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
