On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 11:57 -0500, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 14:21 +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 10:28 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > Some of us, are working with the maintainers to identify which
> > packages are not incorporated into the comps grouping structure
>
> Maybe an RPM package's group should match the (default/primary) comps
> group of that package. That way we theoretically could have a
> "comps-merge" tool which would update comps with new packages,
> automatically sorting them into their respective default/primary groups
> (perhaps marking them as "fuzzy" just to overstretch the gettext
> analogy ;-).
This then implies that all packages are listed in comps which is just
Last time I looked (admittedly quite a while ago), comps also contained
hidden groups, I guess this would be where libraries should go to by
default.
not the case. Many packages are just libraries and thus get pulled
in
only as dependencies and aren't the sort of thing that should be user
visible. Additionally, one of the primary points of the grouping in
comps was to make it so that changes could be made without requiring a
rebuild of the package.
That hypothetical comps-merge tool should certainly only add new
packages, not shove around existing ones.
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011