Darren J Moffat writes: > James Carlson wrote: > > Darren J Moffat writes: > >>> It'd be possible, I think, to use this strategy _only_ for the S10 > >>> backport. > >> Actually that scares me even more, moving a file from one package to > >> another in an update release. Eek! > > > > Why? That's exactly what the original discussion was all about. > > I just have a gut feeling that this is going to cause patch problems.
Indeed. It's not like these waters are clear of predatory species. > > reason they're considering moving files around at all is that the > > current package attributes make the package hollow (not delivered in > > non-global zones), the project wants to deliver in a patch, and that > > can't be changed in a patch. > > Yep I follow that. It just also feels strange that for an S10 update > files would get moved to a non hollow package but if it wasn't for the > update the package would just be come full rather than hollow. > > I so wish we didn't do Solaris updates from patches! Yep; but I don't think that part is fixable right now. At least the original project team shouldn't be on the hook for fixing that. > > If they don't, then it's a new, separate package. > > Which has its own issues in patching :-) Yep. > Maybe it is better I go back into my hole until a proposal actually > comes forward and I can see something concrete rather than making guesses. This all relates to PSARC 2006/366. -- James Carlson, KISS Network <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
