On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 6:21 PM, James Westby <james.westby@canonical.com> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:14:18 +0200, Alexander Sack <asac@linaro.org> wrote:
> Yeah. hwpacks should have a unique id in their meta info. In that way you
> can figure this.

No, what I mean is that we may want to have any hardware pack containing
a kernel to supercede any other containing a kernel. Or instead we might
just want the latest to "win".

hwpacks should have a name, so we can do upgrades, the question is what
other things we might want. Do we want relationships like packages?
(Depends, Conflicts, etc.)

I'm inclined to allow installation of multiple hwpacks at this stage,
and just leave those other questions for later.

I thought a bit more about this and i think the single hwpacks policy makes the "clean up" part mentioned in last sentence of user story 2 easier to implement.

So, hwpack-install can just remember the packages shipped as part of the previous hwpack and then removes those not shipped in the new hwpack.

Remember that on arm we usually don't have a boot menu where you can select one of many kernels ... so having two kernels installed that are suitable for the board would make things kind of random.


 - Alexander