On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 09:18:40AM -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote: > On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 14:48 +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote: > > udeb definition, and there is no need for D-I to have such a huge > > sledge hammer in order to break the tiny (vaporware) issue of game > > loading > > Indulge me another moment, and then I'll shut up. Aren't we just > talking about one package header vs. another? I just don't see the > point in a new "X-" header just to flag this one aspect of game packages > that could just as easily be implemented as a tag. Or if it is a > "sledgehammer" as you say, I still wonder even if the "X-" header is the > most efficient implementation from D-I's perspective, if those headers > should be defined in terms of some debtags classification. I think > that's more consistent from the user's perspective. (I'm assuming a user > might care about locating the subset of packages flagged as D-I game > material outside of the context of doing an actual install. But maybe > I'm totally off-base.)
Ben, ... I am unfamiliar with debtags, can you give us a quick example of how such a tag looks like, and how it could be used to denote a game ? Something like : X-DebTag: d-i-game ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
