At 23:05 Uhr +0900 22.01.2002, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
>Hi,
>I just had a thought on the "plan" and new file format.
>
>Instead of going to a different package file format keep the one we 
>have and use
>ar or tar to make them into one file. The archive could also contain 
>the patches.

I think this is a bad idea.

>
>Fink would then look at the file names in the archive to determine 
>which options to allow.
>
>For example:
>xyz-1.2.3-1.infu is an archive which contains
>xyz.info
>xyz.patch
>xyz-gnome.info
>xyz-gnome.patch
>xyz-ssl.info
>xyz-gnome-ssl.info
>xyz-gnome-ssl.patch


I think it is inferior for various reasons:

* you can't simply use a text editor to edit the package this way
* you still end up duplicating 90% of the contents of the packages, 
thus completly canceling the purpose of allowing "variants" in the 
first place.

Essentially, it takes away some flexibility by adding nothing in return.


Max

>I don't know if this would be harder/stupider than the current 
>suggestions, but thought I'd throw it out there and watch it get 
>shot down :-).

Sure :)


Max
-- 
-----------------------------------------------
Max Horn
Software Developer

email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
phone: (+49) 6151-494890

_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Reply via email to