[OpenIndiana-discuss] IPS idiom for local packages with no dependencies

[Till Wegmüller]

Yeah IPS is a complete re engineering from existing Package managers. On
the Architecture side it has a lot of features that other Package
Formats only added as an after thought.

As to your confusion with perl. That is quite an ugly Hack to have both
a 32bit and a 64bit version of perl available.

Greetings
Till

On 12.02.19 01:44, Tim Mooney wrote:
> In regard to: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] IPS idiom for local packages
> with...:
> 
>> On 02/11/19 04:19 PM, Tim Mooney wrote:
>>> However, most packages that I would have guessed would be "leaves" are
>>> actually required by userland-incorporation or some other incorporation,
>>> so they are effectively "required". 
>>
>> depend type=incorporate does not mark a package required, it just sets a
>> constraint on what version can be installed.   When you're looking at
>> what
>> packages are actually required, you need to look carefully at the type
>> of the depend action, and see what each type actually does in the list
>> in the pkg(5) man page.
> 
> Thanks for the clarification, Alan.  It's appreciated.
> 
> I think my experience with other package managers, especially RPM, has
> actually been a bit of a detriment to learning IPS.  Even after using OI
> for several years now, I'm still finding surprises with IPS.
> 
> Tim