-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 161
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Propose os
candidate type
#161
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
65cbc52
Propose `os` candidate type
5f99ce9
Update PURL-TYPES.rst
fe5a4fc
[os] Add guidance for rolling distros
e1e7425
[os] Add guidance for non-linux os
16b5996
Update PURL-TYPES.rst
5228209
Update PURL-TYPES.rst
896ecda
Update PURL-TYPES.rst
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you know on which OS versions are the
sw_vers
andwinver
utils available?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Couldn't find the exact details, but both appear to be old (oldest references are around 2000 for
sw_ver
and much older forwinver
), and well-supported (availability in various windows variants for eg).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changing
winver
tover
, which is the text version, and reports the fields that are mentioned here.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If the group decides to proceed with this also some updates to https://github.com/package-url/purl-spec need to be made. The description for
type
,namespace
,name
,version
do not align with the proposed use. For exampletype
's description includes the keyword required: "the package "type" or package "protocol" such as maven, npm, nuget, gem, pypi, etc. Required." But in this proposal it is suggested an operating system is a package protocol? This is inconsistent and confusing, I am not sure encoding an operating system in the purl structure will improve comprehension of this specification?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The file
/etc/os-release
is not universally supported by Unix-flavors. Even for Linux it appears to have been introduced initially only by those distros supporting systemd. Perhaps this should be recognized in the text?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Made a change for
/etc/os-release
alternative. I don't think the spec can be 100% exhaustive to cover all possible operating systems, the best we can do is cover the majority of cases, and offer guidance as to what goes in each field.I'm unsure about how the description for fields can be aligned.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We believe that clarity of the specifications helps its adoption and bug-free implementation.