Subject: Re: Proposal: new binary package format
To: Manuel Bouyer <>
From: Jim Wise <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 06/02/1999 18:11:04

On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Manuel Bouyer wrote:

>On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 01:21:51AM +0200, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
>> We could even define patterns to exclude, and give them some nice names:
>> noshare -> exclude .../share*
>> nodoc	-> exclude .../{man,info,...}*
>> ...
>Sounds nice ... We'll probably need it when we switch to pkg format for
>the base system.

(I have been working on this switch for a few months now, and will be
 presenting what I have so far RSN)

The approach I am taking to this point is to guarantee that no system
package installs into more than one of /, /usr, /usr/share, ${X11BASE},
${LOCALBASE}.  To not install the various files under /share, one simply
doesn't install any of the `share' packages.  Of course, it is then your
responsibility to make sure that you mount /usr/share from a server
which has the share packages corresponding to your base packages.  Ditto
for systems sharing /usr, ${X11BASE} or ${LOCALBASE}, of course.

This can be addressed more cleanly if the package system is extended to
allow packages to be registered in more than one place -- e.g. packages
installed in /usr/share could be documented in /usr/share/pkg (name
strictly hypothetical). A system installing a base package with a
matching share component could then depend on the share it is mounting
having the matching component on it.

After the dust settles WRT tv's current package system changes, I will
post a proposal to address this functionality (multiple pkg registration
locations).  ISTR that Alistair had a relevant set of patches, but I
don't remember what became of them.

- -- 
				Jim Wise

Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
Charset: noconv