Paul Jakma wrote: > On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, John Plocher wrote: > >> In a sense this is the "gentoo" model, applied to the whole >> consolidation; it is no longer acceptable to /just/ update a single >> subcomponent, the whole wad needs to be in sync. > > Choice #5: Explicitely list the dependencies in our packages, make our > tools figure out what is compatible based on dependencies. I.e. the > RedHat/Debian RPM/Deb model. We do that. Its called "pkgadd". > I believe that's what our marketing has found that our customers want. > I know for a fact that the lack of such has ruled out Solaris for one > highish-profile web-server deployment.. > > IMHO we really need to stop dealing implicitely with dependency > resolution by dint of big wads... > > regards, Once upon a time, there was a "FRU" project for Solaris. It allowed for dependencies with much finer granularity. It was killed for political reasons. Sigh,...
The Solaris and RedHat/Debian RPM/Deb models have equivalent infrastructure and capabilities. The RedHat/Debian RPM/Deb model works a little better, only because their granularity is finer. If we had finer granularity in our packages, we would work just as well. Its a good idea, but an incredibly expensive proposition to implement system wide. Yea, "the dint of big wads" is a problem. But its not this problem. This problem is: A depends on B, C depends on B-prime, B and B-prime are different versions of the same package/RPM/Deb. You are just as broken on RedHat/Debian is you have two applications which require different versions which is the central issue here. - jek3
