-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 10:42:39 -0700 > Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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-----
