On 2013-09-18 09:17, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On 2013-09-18 6:33, Niels Thykier wrote: >> I think we should take this opportunity to get rid of the "empty" >> PREDEPENDS slot (i.e. have the MULTIARCH field replace PREDEPENDS). >> There is no point in having the empty slot for PREDEPENDS; yours truly >> was just too lazy to figure out how to remove it from the C code when I >> merged PREDEPENDS into DEPENDS. > > Seems reasonable; attached is a diff on top of the earlier patch that > does that, and passes the testsuite (including live-data). >
Thanks, > I've also attached a squashed diff showing the cumulative changes > relative to the live code. I've left the "depends" array as-is because > it's part of the underlying abstraction; I assume the four elements are > intended to correspond to the fields which dpkg/apt consider as > "dependency relations", i.e. pre-depends, depends, recommends and > suggests. If we don't care about maintaining that in the abstraction > then we could probably flatten depends from a deplistlist to a deplist. > > Regards, > > Adam I would probably go with the squashed diff (of the two approaches). Personally, I wouldn't bother with flattening deplistlist to deplist. I would rather see us get rid of that C-module entirely instead. ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
