* Mike Gerdts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-06-10 17:41]: > On 6/10/08, Stephen Hahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You're right that it's independent of your changes. The problem > > actually comes from the "too new" dependencies when we publish the > > -0.91 (say) version of SUNWipkg. So Bart has occasionally published > > an update "back in time"--onto -0.86, or -0.79, or whatever--so that > > there's an up-to-date SUNWipkg that doesn't require a newer Python. > > > > There are a couple of questions here, which have come up before: > > > > - should pkg(5) self-update automatically? > > > > - should we always publish up-to-date pkg(5) packages at all release > > points? > > The incomplete thought that I had was that a versioning scheme like > the following could be adopted: > > <release>-<build>.<release2>.<build2> > > 5.11-0.86 Released with build 86 > 5.11-0.86.5.11.0.90 To get to build 0.90, install this in the > active BE first, then restart pkg > 5.11-1.72.5.12 Solaris 11 is old now, upgrading to Solaris > 12. Install this version first. > > The tricky part seems to be in having pkg know what it is upgrading > to. I'm not aware of any package in the repository that serves as > some sort of a release tag that pkg could take a cue from - perhaps it > just takes a cue from the target version of SUNWipkg. It might be simpler to ensure that the latest implementation of pkg can install any existing, legitimate packages. I believe specific version-version arcs are unneeded in that case, and self-updating should be sufficient.
> I think it would be better to have the ability to... > > pkg image-update OpenSolaris-2008.05-90 > > Which would find a package named OpenSolaris with version 2008.05 and > build 90, then find all of the optional dependencies for it. I'm not > sure that the notion of an optional depedency exists today - > I am suggesting that an optional dependency would say "if this is > installed, it needs to be at this version-build." This package exists; Bart's currently calling it pkg:/entire. Personally, I think that pkg:/entire needs to explode and become the set of packages with a defined tag (and that these are what image-update should, in fact, update, rather than all packages). Excessively centralized objects, like pkg:/entire, usually become development bottlenecks. (Another approach would be to have pkg:/entire depend on pkg:/desktop/entire, pkg:/server/entire, pkg:/system/entire, and so forth. Those would be the parts that get updated by different development teams...) - Stephen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
