And now that we are at it, what would be the preferred way to mark up the
dependencies between packages and other resources in a computable way, i.e.,
in a way that could be derived from a package description, or, even better,
could generate a package description?
Kind regards
Peter Ring
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 6:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: David Mason
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: tagging package names (rpm, deb)
David Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mark Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What's the recommended element for tagging a package name?
> > I'm thinking of debs and rpms, here.
> This is simply a filename. It is a file on your system,
> package or not.
So is a command (usually), but it has semantics that allow it to be
distinguished from its hum-drum existence as a mere file. At least that's
the way I'm thinking about packages...
They're files, all right. But they're very special files. Besides,
I can't let you get away with that answer, it's too easy. :-)
> <filename>docbook-xsl-stylesheets-1.38-2.deb</filename>
<package format="deb" version="2" maintaineremail="[EMAIL PROTECTED]">
docbook-xsl-stylesheets-1.38-2.deb
</package>
<string>Mark</string>
_____________________________________
Mark Johnson
Duke Physics <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Debian SGML <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home Page: <http://dulug.duke.edu/~mark/>
GPG fp: 50DF A22D 5119 3485 E9E4 89B2 BCBC B2C8 2BE2 FE81
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
"unsubscribe" in the body to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
"unsubscribe" in the body to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
