Bart Smaalders wrote:
> 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.
That pretty much sums up the idea that I was trying to get across, but
apparently articulated poorly.
Having the ability for packages (such as DTrace or a compiler) to say
that they needed the "headers" facet installed would be a boon, since it
would allow headers to be installed only if there was software that
needed them.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
