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 1R1KGn-00080Z-K5 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:42:33 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5CB3421C0FE; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 15:42:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 417F321C0E9 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 15:41:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (77-253-154-63.adsl.inetia.pl [77.253.154.63]) (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 9211B1B4002; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 15:41:44 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 17:43:27 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: scarabeus@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Fwd: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for items for September 13 council meeting Message-ID: <20110907174327.5a73e266@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <4E64C7BB.907@gentoo.org> <20071.28643.758959.906951@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.10 (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_/PywdlN1dYNb2ZRJ/3FhXHqG"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: fc764c081e2f5f6a74b07b0733231ba9 --Sig_/PywdlN1dYNb2ZRJ/3FhXHqG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 16:27:01 +0200 Tom=C3=A1=C5=A1 Chv=C3=A1tal wrote: > Well the patches code is in base eclass. Then you should first consider moving epatch to PMS. I'd honestly prefer going the other way. > For Recommended it works like this: > blabla.spec > Recommended: xf86-video-ati >=20 > zypper in blabla > ... > You might consider installing these additional packages: > xf86-video-ati >=20 >=20 > It for sure needs more thinking as this is just basic idea. It might > even take into account that if you install the recommended patckage > with oneshot it should not be depcleaned unless all recommending > packages are gone too, and so on. It had some thinking, and ended up in no agreement. There's really no reason to hack up the spec to replace one hack with another. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/PywdlN1dYNb2ZRJ/3FhXHqG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAk5nkSMACgkQfXuS5UK5QB08ygP/dy2bM3TptQlY7UINOj31K+j1 FahRtRwI8MpvKF0bdHqv1p+qqwsb5hySEt8EbRz3rvNl9uqe4dCUpRk/cR3AQddC /WMNZf6ulRx3ZCUTU8tvuTTSUOKjZafPsgMKxV0QQWoWDG8AX9+YsrMc4PSJ1LIK a6D5IRpHykHKyxAn0bE= =n1hk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/PywdlN1dYNb2ZRJ/3FhXHqG--