From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Qal71-00008z-8f for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 26 Jun 2011 08:54:39 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6D36D1C11F; Sun, 26 Jun 2011 08:54:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FF141C01E for ; Sun, 26 Jun 2011 08:54:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (77-255-13-150.adsl.inetia.pl [77.255.13.150]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E73CE1B4003; Sun, 26 Jun 2011 08:54:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 10:54:44 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Are tags just sets? Message-ID: <20110626105444.366222bf@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <20110626094341.30e1f043@googlemail.com> References: <20110626080257.12d523ef@googlemail.com> <20110626104124.77ed12d9@pomiocik.lan> <20110626094341.30e1f043@googlemail.com> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.24.5; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/7YQI1mXxapewQ.sRvwX/QJU"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 19864d58e3cf9b088c2c24252063e754 --Sig_/7YQI1mXxapewQ.sRvwX/QJU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 09:43:41 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 10:41:24 +0200 > Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > > A 'type' field would be useful as well, to support various kinds of > > package sets (much like portage handles currently). >=20 > I'm highly doubtful that there's any real need for different kinds of > repository-provided sets. We especially don't want sets to be code... Simple things like getting a list of packages which own a particular file (for rebuilds) or grepping a variable are useful to users. For example, the x11 overlay provides a set to rebuild the xorg server modules after an update. > > We'd either want to add || ( ) here, or somehow explicitly specify > > that this is a one-of set. >=20 > No, that's something that's determined by how the set's used, not by > what's in the set. There's no such thing as a "one-of" set; a set is > just a list of package dep specs. Hm, true. I guess noone will want to merge 'a random package matching a tag' :P. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/7YQI1mXxapewQ.sRvwX/QJU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAk4G89UACgkQfXuS5UK5QB0N4gP/euqzlHEBDOBOQSB66vU04Qrm A+bgTJD6QWwOYqWPrpvTymZiIsG0zliSnFe/8+jIJ3a9zo51HQuE9b4WQKVoW9nU nFc+4AhlBY6j2k71CwfvFzLWGRxpkff+cuwM0f1pskpdeWG5ulsu9CjgYmHF2f2t 5gW29XQ07kKlk3p3qLA= =xKUE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/7YQI1mXxapewQ.sRvwX/QJU--