packaging in IPS

[Dagobert Michelsen]

Hi Laurent,

Am 09.12.2015 um 12:58 schrieb Laurent Blume <laurent at opencsw.org>:
> Le 2015/12/09 12:24 +0100, Juraj Lutter a écrit:
>> I'd preferably go with facets, to be more consistent with IPS concepts.
>> We can disaggree with them but they are here and we could probably avoid
>> problems that may arise in the future.
> 
> They are here, and they are one reason I decided to not migrate to S11
> in the first place.
> What problem exists that they fix? What problem may arise in the future?
> Concrete examples please, not FUD.
> I'm not a fan of using stuff just because it's lying around. I use stuff
> when it's the most fit solution to a problem.

1. Enable/Disable development files

I thought of having this also in SVR4 packages with pkgutil by having an attribute
for each package which lists the development package name.

2. Switch to development version with debug symbols enabled and w/o optimization

I would have wished it would be easier on deployed systems which show bugs to switch
to debug binaries/libs easily.


Best regards

  — Dago

--
"You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something,
and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20151209/e377a809/attachment.asc>