dsaferite at yahoo.co.uk
Sat Mar 30 06:49:39 PST 2002
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 15:07:37 +0100
Neven Has <haski at sezampro.yu> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 02:24:13PM +0100, Lee Saferite wrote:
> > <package>
> > <packageinfo>
> For the same resons as for <stageinfo> - I think <info> is enough.
> > <name/>
> > <version/>
> > <base/>
> > <depends>
> > ... (still deciding what I would suggest here)
> > </depends>
> Or <dependencies>?
Sounds good to me, I am horrible with creating names for things. =)
> > <conflicts>
> > ... (ditto)
> > </conflicts>
> What exactly <conflicts> are for? I can see a few uses, but what did
> you mean?
Well, I would say maybe 2 versions of a library or program could
conflict BADLY with each other. In that case you would want to warn
people somehow, no? Like I said before, you wouldn't need to DO
anything with the section, just have it for reference, and maybe future
use. For that matter, you could leave it out and add it in a later
> > </packageinfo>
> > ... (any valid action elements, including <package> and <stage>)
> If we are to remove <*build> elements, same comment as for <stage>
> goes here - naked elements ;).
I'm not sure, do you like or not like 'naked' elements? I would say
that the only elements you should allow under <alfs> are <stage> and
<package>. But under <stage> and <package> you would REQUIRED and info
section and then all the rest would just be action elements and such.
No need really for a container element. I know this is not contradicts
what I said in a previous email, but I don't care if we have a <body>
element or not. I just don't think we need it.
> > </package>
> Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
> and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message
More information about the alfs-discuss