On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 11:52:14AM +1000, Craig Small wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:56:56PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > Given the function of the package I'd really expect to be able to throw > > any random upstream tarball at it and have it fail only in the face of > > insurmountable errors. Something like this that's easily dealt with in > > a standard way shouldn't be such an issue.
> It's never going to be able to do that, realistically. I just gave you an algorithm which would work perfectly well here. All I'm saying is that I expect it to make an effort, not that I expect 100% success. If you're not even willing to have it try then an alternative approach, such as allowing the user to explicitly specify the package name and version, would be a good idea. -- "You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
