[companion-discuss] Re: [desktop-discuss] Re: [tools-discuss] Proposing /usr/gnu, 3

[Eric Boutilier]

Bart Smaalders wrote:

> John Levon wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 10:42:31AM +0100, John Rice wrote:
>>
>>> "I'm a bit concerned that "blessed as a GNU project" is an odd match 
>>> to the desired features of /usr/gnu/."
>>>
>>> I know what you mean. My goal in the orginal post was to have all 
>>> the various OSS tools present on Solaris in a way that makes it very 
>>> easy to build OSS software out of the box.
>>
>>
>> Stephen made it clear that the proposal is only intended to deal with 
>> the
>> problem of name-conflicting GNU projects, and isn't intended to cover 
>> anything
>> else. This seems reasonable to me. For a start, I think this 
>> currently deals
>> with any problems we're likely to have. I'm not aware offhand of 
>> anything we
>> may need to build that has naming problems.
>>
>>> I'm hoping the combination of Bart's proposal on "Serendipitous 
>>> discovery" and Stephen's "/usr/gnu/bin" proposal will go a long way 
>>> to solving the difficulties of building OSS on Solaris. If other OSS 
>>> tools are still missing, that would conflict with what's in /usr/bin 
>>> then we'll need to look again and see if other hierarchies need to 
>>> be introduced, hopefully this will not be the case.
>>
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>> regards,
>> john
>> _______________________________________________
>> tools-discuss mailing list
>> tools-discuss at opensolaris.org
>
>
> Note that the current proposal will allow those with unmodified
> paths to build most open source freeware packages; those dealing
> with particularly provincial packages will need to prepend /usr/gnu
> to their paths.


Glad you mentioned that, because it also follows that this proposal 
should eventually alleviate the main complaint about CSW (blastwave) 
packages; namely, that installing a package often pulls lots of other 
stuff that shouldn't be necessary.

Eric