> Dennis Clarke wrote:
> As a voice from the community I see star as a
> *need* and not just a want. It archive and extracts/packs just about
> anything.
It is a want. A 'need' if nothing else existed which didn't serve similar
purposes.
This goes back to the 'need' for Sun tar, GNU tar, and now star if community
was to choose
only one of them moving forward. A technical whitepaper and some FAQs don't
hurt.
>Alan.Coopersmith wrote:
> Since none of Sun's paying customers have expressed such a requirement
> to Sun, it's going to be up to the community to do
> much of the work to satisfy this "need" - I'm sure Joerg will appreciate your
> help
> on the work required for the integration.
Most of Sun's paying customers might not know what star is or they have other
tools
in place if not commercial solutions. I don;t think they necessarily would come
to
Sun for those solutions unless it was part of a bigger solution.
>> --- On Wed, 12/16/09, Joerg Schilling <joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
>> wrote:
> Sun's paying customers may have resigned waiting for the integration and
> compile it themself.
>
The issue is availability from the source - not Sun. Your star package should
come
by way of inclusion into the package repository. Have Star (i.e. star v1.5.1)
added
in as a RFE and package it for inclusion into pkg.opensolaris.org (i.e.
/contrib).
Don't push boulders uphill anymore. You'll only get a bad back and aching
kneecaps.
~ Ken Mays
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
