[1]http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=3938
   Darren Reed wrote:

     In a discussion on opensolaris-code, I mentioned that
     in an upcoming putback I'll be adding a new i. file
     for /etc/project. The question was asked if I was doing
     anything for IPS. My feeling is that IPS should be
     doing all the hard lifting... or at least it should be!
     To look at the various i.* files in $SRC/pkgdefs/common_files,
     it does not take too long to start thinking
     "can't this be done better?"
     For every text file in /etc that has been updated over
     the years, there is an individual, stand-alone, script
     that does the same thing many times over. You'd be forgiven
     that this directory was a place where software design and
     code-reuse was prohibited. And that there's little choice
     but to continue copying those sins...
     Looking at the set of actions that pkgsend supports, it
     looks like the IPS folks have tried to capture the two
     most common changes that happen - user (/etc/passwd)
     and group (/etc/group). But that's not nearly enough.
     How many i. files are there in common_files?
     And how many IPS actions are there?
     Are we going to pretend no other file in /etc will need
     updating for a new package?
     Will we need an IPS action for each and every file that
     stores data?
     Does a new file delivered to /etc therefore need a new
     IPS action?
     Is that architecture appropriate?
     While the user/group action is nice and user/developer
     friendly, it's really an implementation of a more basic
     action: if a specific pattern isn't present in a file,
     add this line of text (possibly before or after another
     matching pattern.) That is all most of those i. files do.
     Furthermore, it would seem to me that a package should
     be able to supply its own action that other packages
     can later use. For example, if I deliver a file /etc/foo
     in package A and someone else develops package B that
     depends on A and wants to update /etc/foo, why can't B
     use an action that A delivers to update /etc/foo?
     Searching the archives seems to suggest that all
     discussion on this topic has stopped at users and
     groups - that's a start but it is not nearly enough.
     Darren
     _______________________________________________
     pkg-discuss mailing list
     [2][email protected]
     [3]http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

References

   1. http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=3938
   2. mailto:[email protected]
   3. http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to