Peter Tribble wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Shawn Walker<[email protected]> wrote:
Jonathan Edwards wrote:
oh .. and I left something off my original list that I still don't
understand (am guessing it's by design) and see as somewhat problematic with
IPS:
(5) missing no-deps or force install/remove
This is intentional. The package system can't be expected to manage broken
packages. If we provided a --force or --no-deps option, that creates a
broken package graph, which inherently makes the system unmanageable. There
are no plans to implement that functionality.
That's unfortunate. It's the requirement that the system be manageable that
drives requests for dependency overrides. 15 years of managing systems
and software has demonstrated to me conclusively that you need to be able
to override everything. Administrative tools are supposed to help
administrators,
not prevent them doing their job.
Actually, I'd argue that the system becomes *unmanageable* once you
start using --force or --no-deps. As another person pointed out
recently, it essentially means that the user may end up having to do
--force or --no-deps for every single package operation after the first
time they use it.
Remember our goal here is to create a *supportable* system, and I would
guess that the majority of use cases you have now do not require or need
--force or --no-deps.
Instead of focusing on why you want those specific options, you need to
talk about *real* usage cases where you have needed them.
I suspect there is different functionality that will often satisfy the
requirements without breaking the system.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
