Re: [Pkgutil-users] package map file

[Dagobert M. <da...@op...>]

Hi Mark,

Am 28.07.2010 um 14:11 schrieb ma...@pr...:
> On Wed 28/07/10 12:18 PM , Dagobert Michelsen da...@op... sent:
>> Am 28.07.2010 um 12:58 schrieb ma...@pr...:
>>> a) catalogue format changed so that dependencies
>>> are listed by catalogue name, not package name
>>
>> This is virtually undoable as the format is fixed.
>
> Fixed by whom?  pkgutil could easily support both formats.

By the sites using it. OpenCSW catalogs are also processed by pkg-get  
which will
not support alternative catalog formats. Same goes for SunFreeware,  
although
they use an even older format. It must be backward-compatible.  
Additional
files (like description) would be ok, I guess.

>> For what you envision there are hooks which can provide the update  
>> functionality even on
>> package name change.
>
> I don't understand.  What hooks do you mean?  How would I use them  
> to fix the dependency issue?  Please explain further.

See here:
   http://wiki.opencsw.org/package-hooks
The upgrade script would look inside the installed and new package and  
see if the
update would be necessary and how it should be done. It could e.g.  
remove PKGa
and install PKGb as new version instead.

>>> c) some automatic logic for handling version numbers without a REV
>>> component on non-CSW packages (as per my earlier pkgutil patch)
>>> unless an entry in the pkgutil.map file explicitly provides the
>>> version string to use in the catalogue
>>
>> I would prefer to enforce having REV in the pkgmap if the package  
>> doesn't have it.
>> It would obsolete special compare-functions this way.
>
> Defeats the object of supporting third party packages without  
> tampering with them.  We can't force third parties to stick to a  
> particular pkginfo format.  Bear in mind that the REV component of  
> the VERSION string was never a standard anyway (check the pkginfo(4)  
> man page), it was only something that Sun was doing with their  
> packages and I guess Peter thought he may as well do the same thing  
> with pkgutil.  Really PSTAMP is supposed to do this job, according  
> to the official documentation.  For non-CSW packages, we really will  
> need to cope with different variations of VERSION strings.

True. That's why I suggested condensing all version information to REV  
style with
some kind of plugin to bldcat.


Best regards

   -- Dago