[RFC] SRS Section 2

Hui Zhou zhouhui at wam.umd.edu
Tue Feb 1 20:08:48 PST 2005


On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 03:51:08PM -0700, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
>On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 14:37, Hui Zhou wrote:
>> >         * Validation of profiles before any other actions take place.
>> 
>>     What's the point of validation? The only matter is whether the 
>> tool can understand the profile or not. Is there any way to validate 
>> whether a profile is sane or insane?
>
>Run xmllint or something similar agains the DTD to make sure it's a
>valid ALFS profile. You can't just feed it a random XML file and hope
>that something will happen. 

If it is a random XML file, one should hope it gets rejected because 
the server shouldn't understand it. On the other hand, if the server 
understands it, more than not it is a correct valid profile even 
though the profile may not be dtd compliant. An example is HTML. Most 
web browser accepts non-standard compliant html, does the user really 
care? No, as long as it looks all right.

And the validataion won't help much on ensure a correct profile. Most 
deadly mistakes are typos in commands such as "rm -r /", not those 
unmatching tags. Validation just won't help in most situations.
>
>> >         * A package uninstallation feature.
>> 
>> 	That's tough. That may bring the tool close to a full fledged 
>> package manager. It can be a huge task. 
>
>I wouldn't complain if that becomes the case. Right now we don't have
>anything of that nature so if it slowly gets added, the alfs tool only
>becomes more valuable.

Agreed. But I would suggest don't put this as necessary requirement at 
the first place. It is quite a burden. Just make sure all the 
data/info are logged.
>
>> 	Is there any possible profiles that builds a system need 
>> uninstallation of some other package? If not, make it a function of a 
>> complete seperate program. As all the installation data is logged and 
>> hopefully is analysed into a data base, it is not difficult to make a 
>> program to do uninstallation if dependecy is just ignored.
>
>It could be a separate tool yes. But, alfs installs it. It would make
>sense that alfs can also remove the components it installs.

One can come up with a wrapper do it all. For install, invoke alfs, 
for uninstall, invoke un-alfs. If the function is seperate, it is easy 
to maintain. If all the function albeit totaly un-inter-related, were 
in a same big program, it can be a tough job to figure out which part 
is essential for which function.

-- 
Hui Zhou



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list