Hi,

I agree that we'll have to revisit the package naming and
granularity of desktop components, but it's not a top
priority right now.  The reason we chose to bundle components
together under generic package names is the volatile
nature of desktop components.  For example SUNWgnome-wm
changed from librep + sawmill to librep + sawfish to
metacity over the years.  Having a stable package name
made upgrades more manageable.

It's not yet clear to me how easy it is to obsolete or
rename packages with pkg(5)

Laca

On Sat, 2008-05-17 at 14:22 +0100, Lewis Thompson wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I'm an Ubuntu/OpenSolaris user and I want to share my concerns over
> the way we are currently delivering packages on OpenSolaris 2008.05.
> afaik, none of the points I'm making are limitations of pkg/IPS,
> merely that the way that we currently use it to deliver packages
> reflects what we always did with Solaris
> 
> If we look at the SUNWgnome-media-player package (SUNWgnome-media is
> another and I'm sure there are more) we can see that two key
> applications are shipped: rhythmbox and totem, along with helper
> plugins for firefox and a number of plugins for each application:
> 
>     usr/bin/rhythmbox
>     usr/bin/totem
>     usr/lib/firefox/plugins/libtotem-basic-plugin.so
>     usr/lib/rhythmbox/plugins/*
>     usr/lib/totem/plugins/*
> 
> This methodology works just fine for Solaris, with its *very* slow
> (major) release cycles, but OpenSolaris is a totally different beast
> where 'meta' packaging won't work.  This is because the development of
> rhythmbox and totem are separate
> 
> If we look at the way this is handled in Ubuntu (and most other Linux
> distros) we'll find something along the lines of three packages:
> rhythmbox, totem and firefox-totem_plugin (and we could argue that we
> should have rhythmbox-plugins and totem-plugins)
> 
> The benefits to these more fine grained packages are obvious: we can
> upgrade totem and rhythmbox independently of each other (and we make
> it easy for third-parties to release updated packages)
> 
> The drawbacks... I'm hard pushed to think of any


_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to