Resending due to beehive failure to deliver to pkg-discuss.
Elided all but open items. >> src/modules/flavor/base.py >> 61: "in manifest" seems like poor phrasing; it's "on the same action," >> isn't it? > > Yes. How about: > > "More than one $PKGDEPEND_RUNPATH token was set on the same action in > this manifest" Actually, after going through the rest of the review, it's either/or. You can set this on a manifest and then override it by setting it on an action, right? But multiple settings on the same manifest or on the same action are ambiguous? >> 78-92: seems like this could be guarded by "not run_paths," since you'll >> completely disregard it on 108? > > I don't think so - we want $PKGDEPEND_PATH to expand to include both the > standard system paths and the user-set $PYTHONPATH. Maybe I'm > misunderstanding you? No, I somehow missed the use of new_path on 101, and thereby came to the wrong conclusion that all paths through 94-108 would effectively discard it. Sorry for the noise, but do see below. >> src/modules/flavor/elf.py >> 197-199: Is it not valid to use usr/platform/*/kernel? (Not a high >> priority, since I don't think we actually deliver anything there.) > > I don't think so, not for kernel modules - it looks like > usr/src/uts/common/sys/modctl.h defines MOD_DEFPATH, then getmodpath() > in usr/src/uts/common/krtld/kobj.c calls a platform-specific > mach_modpath() defined in various platform-specific copies of mlsetup.c > > [ I'm open to correction, I don't really live near that code, just > passing through :-) ] I also don't find any evidence that we ever look there, so again, sorry for the noise. I certainly don't think you should be looking at the moddir setting in etc/system, so what you're doing is fine. >> 242: You go to a lot of trouble to build the default runpath rp and then >> ignore it if run_paths is set and doesn't include PD_DEFAULT_RUNPATH. > > That's true - I'll check for run_paths and PD_DEFAULT_RUNPATH before > doing all that work. So this is kind of like the new_path/run_path comment above. I just phrased it differently. :) > Thanks again for the review, You're welcome, of course. --Mark _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
