[email protected] writes:
> SUNWtop system/command/top
> SUNWunison system/command/unison
> SUNWunrar system/command/unrar
>
> Under command instead?
Certainly: those are all user commands.
> SUNWgnu-dbm system/database/gnu-dbm
> SUNWjavadb system/database/javadb
>
> OK
I don't think they belong under system: at least gnu-dbm is simply a
library. It seems to me all of system/database should be moved up to
database.
> SUNWatfs system/filesystem/autofs
> SUNWnfsc system/filesystem/nfs/client
>
> If service/{network,storage}/nfs represents the client side,
> perhaps system/{network,storage}/nfs represents the client
> side.
On the other hand, I find it quite confusing that some filesystems live
under system/filesystem while others are under system/{network,
storage}. Especially system/storage is strange.
> The next set involve header file packages. I don't believe
> these really should exist on their own - they either should go
> with a particular subsystem (when we have facets) or
> consolidated into a single system/header package.
Besides, I wondered if they don't rather belong to developer instead of
system. developer/header/system or some such? Otherwise, it is hard to
explain why some headers live under system/header. This is especially
true for stuff like x11 or ibus/iiim.
> For the system/java/* packages, I adjusted the names slightly
> to match the name under the javadoc directory.
Again, it seems strange to have java packages under system.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
