On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <[email protected]> wrote: > Maintainers, > > There's a user request to create symlinks from /usr/bin to > /opt/csw/bin, for instance, /usr/bin/lpr --> /opt/csw/bin/lpr. > > http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=2924 > > I think there might be a use case for it, but at the same time, why > not just set the PATH? I don't mind creating such package, but we're > not putting anything into /usr/bin by the rule. What are your > thoughts? Create a package with symlinks or not? >
Hmm... there then becomes a question of, what to put in the package? for example, we have a gnu links package, that links ALL (or at least most) of the g-prefixed GNU utilities in /opt/csw/bin, to /opt/csw/gnu. That is a cross-package set of links. Should we do the same for this sort of request? If so, which packages/programs should we include symlinks for? or should we make a whole bunch of separate CSWxxx"links" packages? OR... should we make a metapackage, with some sort of config file, and let the user decide? eg: CSWusrlinks, which will reference one or both of /opt/csw/etc/cswusrlinks.conf /etc/opt/csw/cswusrlinks.conf and then if CSWxyz is mentioned there, it will make symlinks into /usr for that package. (in a postinstall script) ORRRRR... do we create another cswclassutils class, where either individual files can be set as in the "usrlinks" class, or it provides a config file, "if the user wants symlinks into usr for my package, make symlinks for the following files automatically..." I think this last one is perhaps the best long term option. for one reason, because it uses class action scripts instead of postinstall scripts, so it is the most future-proof. _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
