On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:54:33AM -0600, Shawn Walker wrote: > > > As a result, I think that any hackery to try to omit these prefixes is > > > a waste of time. > > > > I agree. Omitting the prefixes in the client would seem to be an > > unnecessary hack. But I don't see a reason why the actual package > > names need to include the SUNW prefix anymore. > > Which if you read my other posts, you will see I said. > > The discussion of package naming guidelines is entirely outside the > realm of IPS. It is merely a tool for packages; not a guideline > creator.
Right. The original question got lost in the thread. Anil's RFE was this: > *Modify the naming convention a little.. so we need the end user to > see SUNW, FSW and SFE before the package names? how do we get around > it? Think it is a valid request, though not for Imagine or indeed for IPS. Maybe it is time to have another look at the package naming guidelines. With the IPS FMRIs, prefixes are redundant. Venky. _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
