Install SMF's in standard locations

[Carsten Grzemba]

On 27.01.16 23:12, Peter FELECAN  <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote: 
> 
> Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> writes:
> 
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > Am 27.01.2016 um 19:21 schrieb Peter FELECAN <pfelecan at opencsw.org>:
> >> Carsten Grzemba <grzemba at contac-dt.de> writes:
> >> 
> >>> Packages for x86 and Sparc: IPS can deliver both architectures in one package.
> >> 
> >> Can or must ? If the former, we can just deliver mon architectural
> >> packages as we do today. I don't see where is the advantage of
> >> delivering multi-architectural packages. Is the transport/storage cost
> >> so low that we can ignore it now ?
> >
> > Well, an IPS-package is usually not a blob but installed into a repository
> > server. A client retreives only the files he needs. This may add development
> > files for a library, localization files for the locales you like, optimized
> > and debug versions or just the correct ISA. It is easier for the user if
> > we provide combined packages and I don’t see any drawbacks (apart from
> > people who manually extract p5p-archives and transfer these to the clients
> > which would be very non-ips-lile).
> 
> Well, this shows my ignorance in terms of IPS packaging. The glimpse you
> offer here makes me think that IPS is a different beast from any
> packaging system that I'm used to. When I have some time to spend on it
> I'll read about in more detail to understand it. Until then, I'll lurk
> in these discussions.
> -- 
> 
An other option is to provide two different repositories Sparc and x86. It could be an option for an interim period. Perhaps there is also an advantage for products which take very long to build like Qt.
Does anyone know if it possible to merge Sparc and x86 packages later?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20160128/e4c8ac16/attachment.html>