Hi Sam,
Thanks for the clarification, in that case I'm worrying about an issue which doesn't exist. If
packages don't conflict with the distribution I don't see a compelling reason why they shouldn't go
under /usr.
Best regards,
Stuart
On 29/04/13 21:21, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>>>>> "Stuart" == Stuart Rankin <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>
> Stuart> Hi Sam,
> >> Hi. I'd like to better understand this concern.
> >>
> >> How will keeping things in separate directories make dependency
> >> resolution easier?
>
> Stuart> Because then they could belong to new packages which would
> Stuart> not need to carry the dependencies of the original
> Stuart> distribution packages they replaced. If alternatively you
> Stuart> were replacing distribution packages, e.g. if package P is
> Stuart> replaced by P.moonshot, you might one day get the following
> Stuart> situation:
>
> Thanks, this was a very useful explanation.
> I think we may be miscommunicating somewhat.
>
> The only cases where we plan to replace distribution components are
> cases where we'll leave our packages in /opt/moonshot.
> That is, the openssh case.
>
> libevent is another case where we'll either rename our packages and be
> using a different soname and/or use a static build.
>
> The stuff we're talking about putting in /usr is exactly stuff that
> isn't in the distributions today. And if it gets there, please use
> their packages not ours, or build from source.
>
> In particular we're talking about:
>
> * Shibboleth
> * libradsec
> * Moonshot UI
> * Moonshot GSS mechanism
> * jansson
> * trust_router
>
> --Sam
>
--
Dr. Stuart Rankin
Senior System Administrator
High Performance Computing Service
University of Cambridge
Email: [log in to unmask]
Tel: (+)44 1223 763517
|