Bill Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Jul 02, 2006, Thomas Lotterer wrote: > >>>> On Sunday, 2. July 2006 at 3:44 pm, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It looks like openpkg-import is not included in the 2.20060628 branch. > >> > >The package was omitted by intention. The openpkg-import package is only > >little > >more than an idea. In fact it breaks the fundamental concept of OpenPKG being > >self-contained and almost independent from the operating system. Some OpenPKG > >purists may want to create a new package class CRAP or even EVIL for it :-) > >Well, exceptions and relaxed rules introduced by practical use cases protect > >the package from obliteration ... > > While I understand the motives for eliminating this, it does serve a useful > purpose, much like the x11 package. > > I could argue that this doesn't violate the OpenPKG philosophy of minimal > changes to the underlying OS as it isn't changing anything, just saying to > use the the OS version of something.
Additionally the only thing that we need to be sure of is exactly "what" the minimal requirements of this type of package is. This may need to be taken into account by other OpenPKG rpms. Probably openpkg-import (as an MTA) would only need to provide $prefix/sbin/sendmail compatibility with a minimal set of command line switches. I don't think that mail is sent within OpenPKG by any other means so this minimal functionality should not be a problem but it might be necessary to check that the underlying OS's implementation supports these switches for each supported OpenPKG host OS. x11 probably is a little trickier but I haven't had to worry about that luckily. Simon ______________________________________________________________________ The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org User Communication List openpkg-users@openpkg.org
