On 05/ 1/10 08:14 AM, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
Thanks Albert for answering the questions for me :)
Agreed on all counts.
On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 20:48 -0400, Albert Lee wrote:
The initial request in my original comment was for the stability level
of the spec file syntax. I would guess that it's relatively stable
since you mention below that it has no concept of versioning, and
presumably the format has been used for rpm's for Linux for a very long
time. Is it Committed, Uncommitted, ...?
I have to defer to laca on this one since it's his case. Uncommitted is
probably not unreasonable since packages are already forced to stay in
lock-step with external changes anyway.
Uncommitted sounds good to me.
Okay. As I hinted in a prior message, I'm not entirely comfortable with
a case exporting an Uncommitted interface without including its
specification it in the case materials. If you can include at least the
portions that are specific to Solaris as part of the materials (with the
knowlege that the remainder is externally specified by Linux RPM) to
nail down what the case is actually delivering, that would be welcome.
-Seb
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-arc mailing list
[email protected]
