* Robert Schiele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Jan 19. 2007 11:24]: > > No, I did not miss that discussion but I can't see why all these use cases > have to be unified into a single use case that just does not exist in reality.
Its not a unification, its what these use cases have in common. > > So why do we need "base package set" at all? Such a pattern would be helpful when displaying dependency problems. E.g. when removing glibc from a system, instead of listing hundreds of packages with broken dependencies, YaST could simple tell "this breaks your base system" > > Why do you need a set of packages to name "openSUSE"? If a set of packages > fulfilles the specific needs of a use case then the set is fine, if it does > not, it is broken for that use case. We need to identify the distribution in order to assign the correct update repository. Klaus --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
