On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:12:19PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote: >2011/4/29 Christopher Faylor: >> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 03:23:31PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote: >>>On 24/04/2011 17:10, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>>> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 02:05:54PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote: >>>>> This recognizes any "[version]" line as introducing the information for >>>>> another version, which doesn't have one of the trust levels [curr], [prev] >>>>> or [test], and so isn't automatically selected when setup is >>>>> >>>>> Since the value of <version> carries no meaning, it might make more sense >>>>> to mandate the use of a specific string like "[also]" or "[other]", or >>>>> perhaps "[prev-1]", "[prev-2]", etc. >>>>> >>>>> I have written a corresponding patch to genini >>>>> >>>>> Setup already does all the neccessary sorting in version order etc. to >>>>> use these additional versions. >>>>> >>>>> 2011-04-24 ?Jon TURNEY >>>>> ?<[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>> ? ? * PackageTrust.h (trusts): Add TRUST_OTHER. >>>>> ? ? * inilex.ll: tokenize any other [version] as the T_OTHER token. >>>>> ? ? * iniparse.yy: Add T_OTHER token and set package trust >>>>> ? ? to TRUST_OTHER when it is used. >>>> >>>> Sorry but what is this good for? ?Who would use it? >>> >>>If you are asking why a package maintainer might want this, then for e.g. [1] >>> >>>[1] http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2011-03/msg00049.html >> >> Ok, there's one package maintainer who wants it. >> >> Since this is, IMO, a rather large departure from past convention, it would >> be nice to see if this is something that other people want. >> >> This change will mean I'll need change to the program which generates >> setup.ini so I'd like to make sure that this is going to be used. > >I am in strong favor of this new feature.
Since I didn't see anyone complain that this is a problem, I'd say go ahead and check it in Jon. cgf
