From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kk383-0005dv-In for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:44:31 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EEC33E06A6; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:44:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4ED1E06A6 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:44:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.22.10] (ip68-4-152-120.oc.oc.cox.net [68.4.152.120]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8722E64301 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:44:29 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <48DFEC9C.1070408@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 13:44:12 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080914) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] PROPERTIES=set for meta-packages that should behave like package sets References: <48DECDFE.7010606@gentoo.org> <20080928172423.5544cc51@sheridan> <48DFC20F.4040107@gentoo.org> <20080928212602.76145b4e@snowmobile> In-Reply-To: <20080928212602.76145b4e@snowmobile> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 15df6ad0-62b6-4481-9e05-0bbb876500d4 X-Archives-Hash: 75f7fefea3ec426bc082d244c85ec6ec -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 10:42:39 -0700 > Zac Medico wrote: >> Some some sort of mapping of packages into sets space does seem >> better than changing the behavior of these packages other cases. >> However, PROPERTIES=set will still be useful for governing >> recursion, since recursion into dependencies is probably not desired >> for non-meta packages in the same sense that it might be desired for >> meta-packages. > > So you're saying that if a package depends upon all of foo, and a user > wants to do a deep or empty tree reinstall, all of foo shouldn't get > upgraded or reinstalled? > No, that sort of behavior should be governed by various package manager options. The primary purpose of PROPERTIES=set is only differentiate packages that behave as package sets from those that do not. - -- Thanks, Zac -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjf7JsACgkQ/ejvha5XGaMF1gCfb599X9JM/8rvoOx0mLc5aMMm PN0AoLOOOIewiZSey0O1/jA+lF2F22FV =2xMK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----