Brock Pytlik wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
I think my point is that until we give the user a better way to
control the switching of software sources for packages (publishers),
always using the preferred publisher status is empowering the user to
make those decisions (in a consistent manner) instead of the
hodge-podge we have at the moment.
I disagree that this is empowering the user, I think it's taking some
flexibility away from them. True, it's awkward to switch sources right
now, but at least it's possible to both switch, and not switch, the
source of a particular package right now. If this change went back, it
would no longer be possible to force a package to continue to come from
the same source.
The current way is not documented, nor does it make much sense (from my
perspective). If anything, it sticks out as a glaring inconsistency.
The other problem I have here is that the fix to the publisher
information bug (where the preferred prefix was wrongly retained for
publishers no longer marked as preferred) will break this:
pkg set-publisher -p test1
pkg install [email protected] (installs pkg://test1/[email protected])
pkg set-publisher -p test2
pkg image-update (upgrades to pkg://test2/[email protected])
...unless I fix the case that you want to keep.
So we can't have this both ways; either image-update and install *never*
cross publisher boundaries, or they always do. Since the case above is
expected behaviour (by users currently), I'm inclined to fix the current
case being discussed so they both won't break.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
