Re: package format and creation

The Anarcat <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> Although I'm not sure libh should fulfill all the reasons you mention
> in that listing there. "restore from backup" is the first thing that
> seems a bit to stretched for a libh use.
> 
> However, this shouldn't affect design decisions otherwise than saying:
> "fine, here's libh, you can do a lot of things with it, but you'll
> have to write the scripts".
> 
> In other words, provide a clean way, and a clean interface to write
> such script but don't rot too much on bits that wouldn't be useful to
> all configs. These can be written outside libh without problems.
> 
> libh is, for me, 2 things:
> 
> - console or Graphical UI
> - package library
> 
> the rest is extensions, and we must not focus on those yet. Those
> extensions will have to be written for seperate package configurators
> (e.g. the "net" package configurator or "apache" configurator, etc).

When you say extension do you mean?
	libh/lib/fooext + libh/release/scripts/fooext.tcl

			Max Okumoto

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [email protected]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-libh" in the body of the message