[pca] Problems with UTF patch on minimized system

[Don O'Malley]

Hi Martin/Thomas,

We do test a patch against the standard install metaclusters.

The testing we do should ensure that if a patch has pkgs that are 
delivered as part of a particular install metacluster (i.e. SUNWCXall, 
SUNWCprog, SUNWCreq, etc.), that all required patches that patch has 
will have at least one pkg from the same install metacluster (i.e. we 
ensure that all the required patches can be installed).

It is worth noting that the testing that we do involves testing against 
the defined install Metaclusters, so if a customer has done some custom 
minimization/hardening of their system then this is obviously not a 
scenario that it is possible for us to test.

 From the sound of things Thomas, you had a minimized system which you 
subsequently added the SUNWuiu8 pkg to.
You the ran into issues when attempting to patch SUNWuiu8, as patch 
121734-08 could not install the required patches (as their required pkgs 
are not on the system).
This configuration is way outside of the configurations that Sun support 
and as there is absolutely nothing to prevent you from using 
pkgadd/pkgrm to add/remove whichever pkgs you like from a system, this 
is not something that we ever could support in the current architecture.

Best,
-Don


Martin Paul wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> thanks for your help. I did try to add the mentioned packages but 
>> after that I got even more of these error messages, so I did not try 
>> further.
>
> Yes, the problem is that package A again will require package B and C, 
> and so on, and finally you end up installing "Entire Distribution" 
> anyway. I've always been a fan of "don't install what you don't need", 
> too, but Sun doesn't seem to favour this approach anymore.
>
>> Perhaps there could be implemented a "distribution service" in pca? 
>> We use a proxy-setup and all of our client machines have identical 
>> pca.conf files.
>
> I guess NFS (and a central pca.conf) is not feasible for you? The idea 
> of having a central pca.conf on a proxy might be worth thinking about 
> in the future, though. I'll put it on my ToDo list, but don't expect 
> anything soon.
>
>> I'm wondering, why this problem had not hit me earlier. I use pca for 
>> about 2 years now (GREAT THANKS again to you!) without the need to 
>> add even ONE ignore line. So I thought this is a special problem 
>> which could be solved by the Sunny boys or you.
>
> I've had similar issues reported to me, but probably not more than one 
> per year. Actually, I agree that Sun should be able to fix this. IMHO, 
> it's a bug when package A doesn't require package B, but a patch for 
> package A requires a patch for package B. If you can install package A 
> without package B, I guess you should always be able to install a 
> patch for package A without requiring a patch for package B.
>
>> Thanks again. I really don't know what to do if pca would no exists.
>
> Thanks, me neither. If it wouldn't exist, I'd have to create it :)
>
> Martin.
>