Bart Smaalders wrote:
Darren Reed wrote:
...
For example, rather than use SMF FMRIs as the actuators
that do file assembly, why isn't that an integral part of pkg(5)?
Because as we've all pointed out, that means that packaging system
has to be aware of the all the versions of each of the formats of any
configuration files in the system that have parts delivered by
multiple packages.
Far better than this work be left to the person developing that portion
of the system.
Ok, I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here (I understand
the above argument and I'm reluctant to question this any
further) but I feel compelled to ask one further question O:-)
Why not allow for the person doing the development work
to deliver a plugin to pkg(5) that understands said files instead
of using an SMF service? Or would the complexity of allowing
for such outweigh the benefits? (I can well imagine it might or
conversely offer far less in the way of benefits than can be had
easily from SMF.) Have I answered my own question?
Darren
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
