Joseph Kowalski <jek3 at sun.com> wrote:
> Without commenting about the decision, I'd like throw out a
> few observations even though its already quite obvious that too
> many observations were made. :-)
It seems that I need to comment these statements...
> 1) Any references about a star option "introduced in 1994" is
> irrelevant. In 1994, star was just one of hundreds (thousands)
> of FOSS programs. Sun/Solaris/PSARC can't track or
> mediate random FOSS programs.
You are referring to a typo, it should read 1985.
> 2) On June 16th 2004 when PSARC 2004/480 was approved, star
> became relevant. This is only an approval for "sfw" integration.
> This doesn't make it a hard rule that star/tar should share option
> flags, but the project team should investigate this, expose the
> issue (if there is one) to PSARC and decide their proposed path.
> PSARC can "yea" or "nea" this.
>From 2004/480:
Anticipated future changes:
- usr/src/cmd/cpio modified to link with librmt
- usr/src/cmd/mt modified to link with librmt
- either usr/src/cmd/tar modified to link with librmt, or star
augmented to be a full replacement for the existing Solaris
tar. If the latter is done, usr/src/cmd/tar would be
removed from ON and the binary replaced with a symlink
to the star executable. At that time, star and ustar may
also move from /usr/sfw/sbin to /usr/sbin.
> 3) I believe several people have started to work with Joerg on an
> additional fast-track (for star) with a dependency on 2004/480.
> (Hence, only a review of "goodies" Joerg has added since that
> time.) I know Basabi spent some time with this.
>
> Since Basabi was busy, I tried to help. I was unable to get Jeorg
> to produce a proposal I was comfortable with. This was mostly
> about "getting the words right", rather than any serious contentions
> about the content. I think Joerg might have assumed I would
> write it, rather than edit it - not sure.
No, we did aggree on that there is no need to file a new ARC case. I am curently
working on the integration.
> 4) The fact that 2004/480 wasn't integrated is also (mostly)
> irrelevant. The architecture was approved. If some other
> project team finds that "it was in the way", then some PSARC
> approved remedy would result. (We need not discuss how
> this would be done.)
If Dworkin Muller did not leave Sun, the integration would have been done
already.
> 5) The fact that 2004/480 specified /usr/sfw/bin/star is relevant.
> That is a reflection of importance of "flag compatibility" (or
> non-importance).
Given the fact that Sun recently decided to prefer to use /usr/bin for
this kind of programs, I see no relevence of the path that has been
mentioned in 2004/480.
J?rg
--
EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
