Re: updaters
Re: updaters
- Subject: Re: updaters
- From: Crawford Kyle <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:36:48 -0500
On Feb 18, 2009, at 5:45 PM, Iceberg-Dev wrote:
On Feb 17, 2009, at 6:45 PM, Greg Neagle wrote:
As a systems administrator, I expect the changes an installation
package makes to be documented in the Archive.bom (for bundle-style
receipts), or in the receipts database (for Leopard-style flat
packages). I don't expect to have to reverse engineer what a
postinstall script installed.
What's possible to do is this:
- have a .bom file that describes what will get installed.
- install nothing from the pax payload
- install everything from a postinstall script.
It just requires to build a standard package and a package that
installs nothing. You then replace the .pax[.gz] payload with the
one from the empty package. When you install this package through
Installer.app (tested on Tiger):
- when you display the list of files from the UI, it lists the files
- when you run the installation, it installs nothing and succeeds.
This seems like a good idea. Is there a way Apple could enforce
this? For example the installer would warn if the installer wrote
files not listed in the bom. There needs to be incentive to do the
right thing.
The goal here is to keep us sysadmins happy and potentially allow for
uninstalls without having to reverse engineer and repackage packages
provided from software vendors.
Kyle
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Installer-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden