* houghi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Jul 12. 2006 11:41]: > > A realy nice idea. How does it work? Does it still use the *.sel things, > or is it something completely new?
Its an extension of the .sel format. But I'd rather come up with a completely new spec. The current .pat format has different tags for "package dependency" and "pattern dependency". Thats confusing. Ideally, the tag name would denote the dependency (requires, conflicts, ...) and the tag value would denote the target (i.e. package:foo, pattern:bar, ...) > > So what are the technical differences between what we have and what we > will get? Will adding one cause trouble over the other? Selections don't have hard package dependencies. Packages listed in a selection are selected for installation if available. If not, they're silently ignored. There also nothing which prevents you from de-installing all packages of a selection. The selection still stays installed. Thats bad. Patterns fix all these bugs. A pattern can have hard requirements (to packages or patterns) and force packages being installed. De-installation of required packages will trigger a dependency conflict for the pattern. If you still want selection semantics, just make all pattern requirements weak. Klaus --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
