> Personally, I think it would be great if (when feasible) package names > could correspond with actual (project and executable) names.
+1 I think it is kinda annoying if you want to install gimp and have to search for it first to find 20 matches and then have to figure out that the package is actually called SUNWgnome-img-editor Erik > > Take care. > --joanie > > On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 09:26 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > Now that the bulk of the feature development for pkg(5) is finished > > for 2010.next, I'd like to get a few of the distribution-oriented > > changes lined up as well. First among these is Rich's proposed set of > > package renames, as proposed in > > > > http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=6186 > > > > These follow the various threads we've had on package naming: > > > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/pkg-discuss/2008-March/002354.html > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/pkg-discuss/2008-May/003501.html > > > > In 2009.06 and subsequently, we've been introducing new packages under > > the new scheme, in part to see the effect on the clients, but also to > > determine . With Danek's work on renaming and obsoletion, and the > > legacy action (for SysV dependency handling), we can proceed to rename > > the bulk of the remaining packages. (There are a few packages that > > may live under their old names until refactoring and removal.) > > > > To recap these changes at a high level: > > > > - packages intended to be installed by a user should have a unique > > basename, to ease use of the short form, > > > > - the following top-level package categories are introduced > > > > audio > > codec > > command > > compress > > developer > > doc > > driver > > editor > > games > > gnome2 > > image > > library > > mail > > network > > package > > platform > > print > > release > > service > > shell > > source > > storage > > system > > text > > web > > x11 > > > > - Of these, the "system", "library", and "platform" categories are > > expected to contain packages not of interest to a typical user. > > > > - Packages delivering only an smf(5) services are expected to use the > > "service" category. > > > > - "release" is expected to be a distribution's means of delivery for > > distribution-wide files, such as a product README, a license, and > > distribution-specific content. It should be the eventual home of > > branding packages. > > > > - The "bundle", "feature", "group", and "vendor" categories are still > > reserved, although the distribution may start introducing > > "group"-categorized packages to simplify the writing of installer > > manifests. We'll start a separate discussion for that proposal once > > it's ready. > > > > In this scheme, operations we've seen complaints about should become > > intuitive: > > > > # pkg install bison > > # pkg install firefox > > ... > > > > If you identify a popular package for which the pkg install invocation > > isn't obvious (or nearly so), please comment. Please review the lists > > in 6186 for package names and add your comments to that bug, or share > > them here. Although we can adjust names later via subsequent renames, > > we would like to get "close" on this first integration, so comments > > are definitely welcome. > > > > Thanks > > Stephen > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > pkg-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
