Re: status questions

Joe Shaw <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.rpm.metadata
Message-ID <1068060918.7947.6.camel@bacon>
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 01:31, seth vidal wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>  I was just wondering what people think of what we've come up with so
> far. Does it seem workable for all the various projects/programs? Are
> you comfortable with the file layout? 

Things seem well.  What happens when you run the script on a directory
with multiple versions of a package?

>  - are the checksum-style ids consistent/compliant for everyone?

For RC it'll mean increased memory/processing overhead, as everything is
done based on nevr.  It would be worthwhile making that an element in
the additional metadata files instead of a comment now that I think
about it more, but if not, we'll deal.

> Also if this works out it might be useful to propose that this format be
> given some sort of lsb-status (eventually) - I think Jeff J. originally
> suggested this.

Sounds okay, although I wouldn't bend over backward for it.  I think if
we all agree on it enough to add it to our projects that's endorsement
enough (the freedesktop model as opposed to the lsb model).

Joe
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.