[OmniOS-discuss] Python difference

[Theo Schlossnagle]

Agreed.  I think we've had a considerable amount of regret that python was
not put into to a "system internals" path.

And I know I regret having Java and Perl in there at all.  It's been stated
a few times that as soon as the two bits that depend on Java get removed or
replaced that Java will go out the window.

Also, having used distros from every modern and many not so modern unicies,
I would say that any that provided perl or python in their distro did so
with horrible woe (at least in hindsight).

On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Tim Rice <tim at multitalents.net> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2014, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
>
> | A package (like ha) should either rely on the system python packages /
> | versions it needs to work (thus preventing your upgrade to 012) or more
> | reasonably rely on its own known-good python.  I don't believe OmniOS
> makes
> | any release-to-release compatibility guarantees for python (or perl or
> java
> | for that matter). The only reason they even exist in the core is because
> we
> | have other core requirements that depend upon them.
>
> Anyone coming from a UNIX background knowing that OmniOS has
> it's roots in OpenSolaris would reasonably expect that something
> depending on programs/libs found in /usr/bin,/lib,/usr/lib would
> continue to work on the next release. If omniti chooses not to
> have any compatibility guarantees for python (or perl or java),
> they should be moved to a separate tree (perhaps /usr/omnios or
> even /usr/omnios-private). Kind of like how Solaris put the unstable
> bits in /usr/sfw.
>
>
> --
> Tim Rice                                Multitalents
> tim at multitalents.net
>
>
>

-- 

Theo Schlossnagle

http://omniti.com/is/theo-schlossnagle
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omniosce.org/ml-archive/attachments/20141213/fee2338c/attachment.html>