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

[Nicolas Williams]

On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:09:23PM -0700, Brock Pytlik wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
> >I want to say the same thing, but for now I can't quite agree.  The
> >namespace issues are important.  At the very least IPS needs to deal
> >sanely with:
> >
> > - two or more pkgs in one repository with actions
> >  
> I assume you mean actions which overlap? This may or may not be an 
> issue, depending on what packages a user wants to install. It would be 
> nice if we could (optionally) catch this at publication time and that's 
> something we may work towards in the future. Of course, this doesn't 
> solve the problem of third party software delivering conflicting 
> actions, but at least we could be self-consistent.

I don't necessarily think it a bug to allow pkgs with conflicting
actions into a repository _as long as_ they are treated as mutually
exclusive (including from incorporations).

> > - a user trying to install one or more pkgs whose actions would
> >   conflict with those a pkg that's already installed
> >  
> Known bug: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=3822
> One thing that's holding this up is that there are issues with the 
> current nevada pacakges delivering conflicts (see the dependent bugs of 
> that bug). Until we deliver a self-consistent set of packages, IPS is 
> somewhat constrained on what we can do.

Understood.  Until then I think /opt must continue to be the place where
SW is delivered that is not integrated into OpenSolaris (with /contrib
being a repository of wannabe integrated packages.  And when these
issues are addressed then the /opt issue can be revisited (though I
think I'd still want to see a registry in place before we really kiss
/opt goodbye).

Nico
--