[csw-maintainers] CSW packaged MTAs and /usr (continued from "CSWcswclassutils: it wants to write in /usr")

[Sebastian Kayser]

Ben Walton wrote on 14.01.2010 00:41:
> Excerpts from Sebastian Kayser's message of Wed Jan 13 16:59:02 -0500 2010:
>> or would it rather be preferable to say
>>
>>     pkgrm <syssendmail-pkgs> && ln <cswbin> <sysbin>
> 
> This should be:
> 
> ... && ln -s <cswbin> <sysbin>
> 
> since the binaries won't be delivered to /usr.  I personally still
> think this stinks (I use exim, but it's the same pita)...anyway, like
> many other things on solaris, I'll continue to hit them with my
> cfengine hammer.

As with the similar discussion about cups, system integration could also
be handled by an optional "integration package". For starters, my main
focus is to produce a simplified and updated postfix package.

>> I am specifically thinking about the latter option because of Solaris
>> patches. What would happen if we left the system sendmail packages in
>> place and simply moved away the binaries? Wouldn't a sendmail patch
>> notice the installed sendmail package and overwrite our link with
>> possibly patched binaries? Granted, pkgrm wouldn't make it easy for a
> 
> Yes, the package tools would overwrite the link and restore the system
> sendmail.  There is a setting that can be toggled to prevent
> this...I'd have to look it up as I'm not sure what it is off the top
> of my head.

If such an option exists, that would help alot. Than we could simply say
"move old binaries away, symlink our binaries, and set this option".
Provides an easy rollback option to system sendmail, though users would
need to make sure to re-apply patches which they might have missed in
the meantime.

> Since we need to live with these unfortunate rules, I think your
> approach of simplifying the package and providing 'guidelines' via
> README.CSW is the best option.

Thanks for the feedback, Ben.

Sebastian