Shawn Walker wrote:
Brock Pytlik wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
...image-update will not upgrade to [email protected] even though test2 is the
preferred publisher. It didn't make any sense to me that install
and one case for image-update would update a package despite
whatever publisher was originally used for installation while
another case would not.
I'm fine with that working as specified as long as if I'd said pkg
install pkg://test1/[email protected], the image-update didn't take me off
test1. If your change continues that behavior, I don't object to it.
But install will take you off test1, and image-update will take you
off test1 today depending on what order you set the preferred
publishers. That was the whole point of this fix.
To be clear, today if you:
* Assume publisher test1 has [email protected] and publisher test2 has [email protected]
pkg set-publisher -P test1
pkg install [email protected]
pkg set-publisher -P test2
pkg image-update
...then image-update *will* take you off test1,
This part is fine.
*even* if you did pkg install pkg://test1/[email protected].
This part is broken.
The bug here is that if the installed publisher of a package doesn't
match the preferred publisher at the time of installation,
image-update will not cross publisher boundaries.
Go ahead and make this change if you think it's moving in the right
direction, I don't, but I also could be off my rocker on this subject.
Fundamentally, I think this is all pointing to the fact that we need a
much more sophisticated approach than preferred vs non-preferred, that
we need to track more carefully user intent for situations like this,
and that all of that needs to "do the right thing" by default, once we
decide what the right thing is, while also letting an advanced user
tweak things to their liking.
Brock
Cheers,
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
