John, When you say:
"I'm a bit concerned that "blessed as a GNU project" is an odd match to the desired features of /usr/gnu/." I know what you mean. My goal in the orginal post was to have all the various OSS tools present on Solaris in a way that makes it very easy to build OSS software out of the box. The /usr/bin/gnu proposal helps to bring all the GNU tools onto Solaris in a consistent namespace that ensures that prefixing your path with /usr/bin/gnu will allow the appropriate unmodified GNU tool to be picked up for building OSS. So that helps a lot, however if there are other non GNU OSS tools required that are not already in /usr/bin then what do you do? Hope they are already in /usr/bin/sfw, have no name conflict with what's in /usr/bin and so can be moved into /usr/bin providing they have the appropriate level of stability. If this is not the case then you have a problem. But as they say, Rome wasn't built in a day. I'm hoping the combination of Bart's proposal on "Serendipitous discovery" and Stephen's "/usr/gnu/bin" proposal will go a long way to solving the difficulties of building OSS on Solaris. If other OSS tools are still missing, that would conflict with what's in /usr/bin then we'll need to look again and see if other hierarchies need to be introduced, hopefully this will not be the case. JR John Levon wrote: >On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 10:00:55AM -0700, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > > >>>For 2), which has happened before, what would we do? >>> >>> >> Decide, based on the stability of the component, whether to evict it >> rapidly or not. Has this really happened for a name-conflicting >> component, or merely across the entire set of OSS software? >> >> > >I don't believe it has yet happened for a name-conflicting component. Given >that there is precedent for this happening generally, and we'll be stuck with >/usr/gnu/ forever, I think we need some kind of plan here. > > > >>>I'm a bit concerned that "blessed as a GNU project" is an odd match to the >>>desired features of /usr/gnu/. >>> >>> >> It sounds like you're proposing different desired features (which is >> >> > >I was basing my comment on "desired features" upon the comments during the >original thread started by John Rice which sparked this proposal: >as: > >"The problem is really down to the various build tools or lack of them on >Solaris that OSS just expects to be there on a Unix box if it is to be able to >build with out lots of hair loss on the part of the user." > >If that's not actually the primary reason for this proposal, then my apologies. > >regards, >john >_______________________________________________ >desktop-discuss mailing list >desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/desktop-discuss/attachments/20060505/c78ac4f0/attachment.html>
