> Adding water to a boiling and already full kettle... > > Why can't we use a concept similar to this: > > <assume> > vfat is used > </assume> > > Package name: pppd-2.1.4 > Package files: pppd-2.1.4-bin.lrp, pppd-2.1.4-conf.lrp > > pppd-bin.lrp contains all necessary binaries and 'non-editable' scripts, > pppd-conf.lrp contains all configurable files. > > All we will need then is to backup only the ???-conf.lrp files. > > I am perfectly aware of the problems this solution brings along, > but hey, at least it's one more opinion/idea!
I'm strongly considering something like this if I ever get back to working on the packaging system again (currently stuck in boot-strap & development environment issues), although I'd probably do something like: pppd-2.1.4.leaf pppd-2.1.4.conf There's also the issue of using a single "default store" package, which could possibly also be supported by the same package system. The user could then choose how they wanted to backup...by individual package, or "en masse". Charles Steinkuehler http://lrp.steinkuehler.net http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror) _______________________________________________ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
