On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 11:01:04PM -0600, Shawn Walker wrote: > I expect to seem them because that is the standard Sun has set forth > for package naming.
True, and it was necessary for the old SVR4 packages. Are they still relevant now? > The perceived benefit they currently provide is: > > * Ensuring a unique name for packages (in theory) The new IPS package name FMRI provides for this already. > * Identifying the source of the packages (by indicating which company > they are from) Again provided by the FMRI. > * Grouping packages together by origin Same here. > This was discussed many times before during the original package > discussions. Since IPS provides for a rich set of meta data, a > "non-abbreviated, un-mangled name" can be provided in the metadata and > used in the packaging system instead of the actual "package > installation name" for the purposes of searching and browsing. Sure, but do the names need to be abbreviated and mangled anymore? > 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. Venky. _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
