On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 04:56:41PM -0500, Michael K. Johnson wrote:
> If fl:3 is based on f:20, then fl:3 could have a similarly rich group
> structure though probably it should be simplified, and definitely it
> should be implemented with GroupSetRecipe so that it cooks about 100
> times faster...

can you explain what GroupSetRecipe is doing differently?
is that a new feature that fl:2 could be switched to if we were still
developing it or are there other reasons for not using it in fl:2?

> That's in my example above: to mark that packages should work
> against f:20, you create labels like what I have above.
> 
> If a package is specifically only going to work against fl:3,
> even if fl:3 is built against f:20 (to start with), perhaps
> because it depends on some additional software added to fl:3
> relative to f:20, then you would put it on the
> foresighters.rpath.org@fl:3 label instead.

wouldn't it be the other way around? if i have a package that doesn't
specifically only work with f:20 i put it on fl:3

greetings, martin.
-- 
eKita                   -   the online platform for your entire academic life
hackerspace beijing     -                                    http://qike.info
--
chief engineer                                                       eKita.co
pike programmer      pike.lysator.liu.se                          caudium.net
foresight developer  realss.com                            foresightlinux.org
unix sysadmin        trainer           developer            societyserver.org
Martin Bähr          working in china        http://societyserver.org/mbaehr/

_______________________________________________
Foresight-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.foresightlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/foresight-devel

Reply via email to