On 06/16/11 15:12, Shawn Walker wrote:
On 06/16/11 14:44, Brock Pytlik wrote:
On 06/16/11 11:23, Shawn Walker wrote:
On 06/10/11 00:13, Brock Pytlik wrote:
Webrev:
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~bpytlik/ips-18441-v1/
[snip]
lines 2199-2200: Having unfreeze display packages as well as freeze
is inconsistent with the paradigm we use for other commands. I'd
rather not have both of these commands be capable of displaying the
list of frozen packages. This is also not documented in the man
page.
It exactly mirrors the paradigm that avoid uses. Since that looked like
freeze's closest cousin, I used that as my reference.
A single subcommand does not consistency make :-)
With that said, I'll defer to Danek or Dan's opinion here.
I talked with Dan last night about this, and he wasn't thrilled, but he
also thought it was something we could add later, so that's what I'm
going with for now.
...
You may also want to mention that publisher information in the FMRI
will be ignored. (That is, you can't place publisher-specific
freezes, although that might be a nice future RFE to allow
per-package stickiness.)
Well, it's not ignored, it's used during the matching, that's why I
didn't complain if the user put a publisher there.
What I meant was, as you've written it, I don't think specifying a
freeze of 'pkg://solaris/web/firefox' (assuming web/firefox is
installed) would prevent installation of web/firefox from a different
publisher. Or does it?
No, you're correct. Doing something like "pkg freeze 'pkg://solaris/*'"
is valid and does something very different than "pkg freeze '*'". It
wasn't for use cases like that, I would've just prevented the user from
specifying a publisher at all. Sure, I can add a sentence to the man
page that says, "It does not constrain a package to a particular
publisher." Please wordsmith as you'd like.
Brock
-Shawn
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
