On 04/ 7/10 04:51 PM, Charles Binford wrote:
Shawn - thanks. The opensolaris.org/dev vs. ipkg.sfbay/dev publisher
appears to have been the root of my issue.
Some final questions:
- the "-O" option for pkg set-publisher is used by onu and your
instructions below, yet I don't see it in the pkg man page.
It was removed from the documentation because it is intended to be be
obsolete soon; -g and -G are the replacements for it. So, the
equivalent command would be:
pfexec pkg set-publisher -g http://ipkg.sfbay/dev \
-G http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev.
- seems the README.pkg file often pointed to for "how to debug pkg
problems" should explain the publisher issue I had (where my bits didn't
include some of the the required packages (e.g. from swf) so the
secondary publisher needs to be ipkg.sfbay). I started with an
auto-install iso and everything I saw told me to change the publisher
from pkg.opensolaris.org/release to pkg.opensolaris.org/dev. I had read
the flag day email referenced on onnv.eng that points to ipkg.sfbay/dev
but had not understood the significance of it.
Seems to me the above two, plus your comment below about a misleading
error message, justify some documentation bugs against pkg.
It's not intended that the user go through this arduous process to debug
problems like this. That's why there are a few RFEs open against pkg to
improve the error messaging in these failure cases.
Generally, I'd say that if we need documentation to explain an error
message, that message should probably be changed instead :) Of course,
sometimes messages will be somewhat difficult to understand -- trying to
generate clearly comprehensible English in an automated fashion is
difficult at best.
As to the changes in README.pkg, you'd need to send that to whoever
manages the on-nightly repositories.
-Shawn
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
