Tom Mueller (pkg-discuss) wrote:
> Bart,
> In the facet and variants design, would it make sense to allow a package
> to declare a dependency on the image having a certain facet? This would
> allow packages containing compilers, Dtrace, etc. to declare that
> headers need to be installed.
>
> When a package with that type of dependency is installed, it would go
> back through all of the existing packages and pick up the actions that
> match the required facet, if those actions aren't already installed.
>
> Tom
I was mulling over something like this as well... I'd rather do this
than to have implicit dependencies ("make sure to grep through the
package list and install everything that's -devel to pick up the
headers"). I'm still mulling over the user experience; the side
effect of installing additional facets of already installed packages
seems pretty analogous to installing additional dependencies.
In general, this will somewhat hinder minimization efforts, but that's
prob. ok here.
What it argues for is defining a sufficient number of facets to prevent
the installation of large numbers of unneeded files.
- 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
