[indiana-discuss] "no scripting zone" and isaexec(3C) == architectural

[Nicolas Williams]

On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 04:34:52PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
> >I myself am not sure where third-party pkgs should install into.  FOSS
> >could always be integrated directly into OpenSolaris via the
> >consolidation process, or perhaps via /contrib, in which case it will
> >end up in /usr -- to me this argues for third parties packaging FOSS to
> >install into /usr, and I'm not sure why non-FOSS should be treated
> >differently in this regard.  Right now I lean towards third parties
> >installing code into /usr.
> 
> Which is why I believe it belongs in /usr.  Again, I have no idea what 
> ARC has or has not decided beyond the serendpituous discovery cases, 

You surely can know: read the case materials/opinions.  (They say
nothing about /opt being deprecated.)

> etc.  All I know is that the reasons stated for moving stuff from 
> /usr/sfw, etc. seem equally applicable regardless of who provides the 
> software.

Maybe.  The difference between third-party and ARC-reviewed software is
this: the ARC manages the namespace to prevent conflicts, while third
parties don't.  Of course, there can be conflicts in /opt, but those are
unlikely, particularly if third-parties use the stock symbol prefix
tradition.

Right now our only namespace management for things in /usr (in /usr/bin,
...) is this: first one there wins, and to win you need to a) ARC, b)
integrate.  If third parties can deliver straight into /usr/bin and
friends then what should users do when conflicts arise?  How will two
parties resolve the conflict over a desirable name?

Nico
--