I second this idea. It is something I have been missing since first starting to use pkg_*.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 10:55:12AM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 10:33:22AM +0200, Karl Sjvdahl - dunceor wrote: > > On 8/30/07, Edd Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On 30/08/2007, Jona Joachim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > You can find it here: > > > > http://hcl-club.lu/svn/development/python/cutleaves > > > > > > This is useful! Why not write a port? > > > > > > -- > > > Best Regards > > > > > > Edd > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > http://students.dec.bournemouth.ac.uk/ebarrett > > > > > > > > > > Why not extend pkg with this insteed? Sounds like something people > > woudl have intrest in. Maybe espie@ already has something similar in > > mind? > > This has been broached several times. If you look at packages in 4.2, > you'll notice the stuff that has been explicitly installed by users is > tagged with @option manual-installation > > The aim is to be able to say `okay, wipe out everything not manual-installed > that's no longer needed as a dependency'. > > I still need to check how this works in real usage, but that was the point. -- / Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
