Jochen wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I am working on improving the installation of OpenOffice.org (OOo) on > OpenSolaris. Particulary I try to make the installation of > OpenOffice.org extensions work. On Solaris an extension comes with its > own package and is installed by executing a postinstall script. The > script executes a tool named unopkg which will be installed as part of > OOo. If the postrun service is available then the installation will be > deferred to it. Since IPS does not support postinstall scripts, the > extensions are not installed on OpenSolaris. > > An idea is to use an SMF service which will then do the installation of > the extensions. The service would be installed as part of the office > installation. When the service is eventually started it will install the > extensions and then go into the offline state. This could be achieved by > defining a dependency on a file. When this file does not exist then the > dependencie is satified and the service runs. The start method would > install all extensions and then write this file. Then the service would > go offline because of the unsatisfied dependency.
Clever, but, this won't work like you want it to -- file dependencies aren't dynamic in SMF today, they're evaluated only at certain times, not at all times that the file is updated. I also don't think you want to create a service on the system that will be "offline" all the time when soffice is installed. I think there are other solutions to this problem with gnome and the font stuff, and it'd be good to follow their precedent rather than creating a new one. > > The problem is this flag file. The dependency can be defined so that it > is satisfied when the file exist or does not. So there are two possible > scenarios: > > a) The file is written later. That is, it was not installed by a pkg. > Then this file would probably not uninstalled and prevent also a couple > of folders from being deleted. > > b) The file is installed. Deleting the file later would cause pkgchk to > declare an error. I looked for the v and e attributes (pkgmap), but they > do not include the case that the file is removed completely. > > Have I overlooked something? Is there maybe a possibility to declare a > flag file in a different way (which I don't know of yet :-) )? liane _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
