> But the next release of Solaris will use the new
> packaging systems and
> installers, so SXCE is farther from Solaris 11 than
> OpenSolaris is.

And that also was my point:

because IPS is so radically different than SVR4 package format, whoever made 
these decisions just caused us double workload and doubled the cost.

Because if we want to be ready for the future, we must now maintain two sets of 
packages for every component - one for the enterprise, which is what feeds us 
and pays the bills, one for being ready for the future.

But that costs tremendous amounts of effort and money; it's very expensive.

pkgadd(1M) could have been incrementally improved with the backgraph algorithm 
in AWK and "the C programming language" books which the make(1) tool also uses, 
why wasn't this done instead?

pkgadd(1M) could have been incrementally improved, based on pkgtrans(1), to 
have knowledge of true package clusters instead of the loose package 
metacluster (like "SUNWCall"), why wasn't this done?

pkgadd(1M)'s capability to install packages via http:// protocol could have 
been extended further, coupled with the dependency resolution algorithm, to 
automatically install any and all needed packages over the network, like yum 
install and pkg_get(1M) do; why wasn't this done?

I understand you might not have the answers to these questions; but surely 
someone inside of Sun Microsystems knows!

WHY?

Of course, the answer could be "if you really need it, you could do it 
yourself", and indeed, I can do it myself.

But then, I also have to logically ask myself: if I have to do it myself, what 
exactly do I need Sun engineers for? For what?

They are not giving me what I want or need, and I know how to do it myself, 
what do I need them for then? Seriously?

> "Radically"?   It's a different packaging system and
> installer, and a few
> default preferences different - something like 99% of
> the binaries are
> bit-for-bit identical.

A packaging subsystem can make or break the OS choice in lights out management 
environments, where one has to manage tens of thousands of systems completely 
non-interactively and automatically.

No Flash(TM) capability (or 1:1 equivalent of it) is also a very grave and 
serious flaw in OpenSolaris. I don't believe I'm capable of stressing and 
putting in words just how critical the capability of having a compressed image 
of a system stripped of all system-specific information is. It's ultra critical 
for large environments.

> That's exactly what OpenSolaris gives you today - a
> chance to test your
> software and prepare for the future and be ready for
> Solaris 11.  It's
> closer to that future than SX:CE is, and ending SX:CE
> simply stops you
> from wasting your time on dealing with the things
> that are known not to
> be part of the next Solaris enterprise release.

At double the effort and the cost, because the packaging system is radically 
different.

And very, very poorly documented!

For instance, what is the equivalent of pkgmk(1) for IPS?
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to