On 8/11/15, Jens-Ulrik Petersen peter...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 8:39 PM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Do you think this is the way how regular users install software?
I think a lot of people install yum groups. It is a pretty useful
functionality IMO.
If
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 8:39 PM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Do you think this is the way how regular users install software?
I think a lot of people install yum groups. It is a pretty useful
functionality IMO.
If meta-packages become a viable replacement for comps then we can
On July 29, 2015 2:06:52 PM PDT, Richard W.M. Jones
rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:45:57AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
ocaml
The comps.xml group for ocaml is pretty weird. It has some mandatory
base packages, which are OK-ish (although there are some notable ones
On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 11:46 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
this thread, comps has things such as the (still mysterious to me)
environment groups,
Environment groups are, quite simply, groups of groups. That's the
entirety of the matter. They have a 'grouplist' of member groups that
are
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:45:57AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
ocaml
The comps.xml group for ocaml is pretty weird. It has some mandatory
base packages, which are OK-ish (although there are some notable ones
missing such as ocaml-camlp4-devel and ocaml-labltk-devel).
Then it has a strange set of
On Wed, 29 Jul, 2015 at 21:06:52 GMT, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I've never used comps.xml and don't really know what it is good for,
except I know of the existence of some graphical tools which consume
it. Richard Hughes's appdata seems like a more complete concept for
people that want that
Dne 14.7.2015 v 22:22 Oron Peled napsal(a):
On Tuesday 14 July 2015 10:13:43 Vít Ondruch wrote:
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down
significantly)? I know that this will not happen from day to day, but I
see the comps just as an ugly workaround for missing weak
Dne 14.7.2015 v 19:05 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:53:49 +0200
Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
...snip...
* The comps.xml groups also provide grouping for
logically-connected packages that do not map to weak dependencies
well. (For example: an astronomy group could
On 07/15/2015 10:20 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Description and Summary can be localized in .spec file [1], where
supposedly names in comps terminology refers to summary in .spec
terminology. Including translations is encouraged in guidelines as well
[2, 3], unfortunately without any further details
Dne 15.7.2015 v 13:11 Martin Kolman napsal(a):
On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 12:53 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 15.7.2015 v 12:21 Mathieu Bridon napsal(a):
On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 10:51 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 07/15/2015 10:20 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Description and Summary can be localized in
--
Mathieu
On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 10:51 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 07/15/2015 10:20 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Description and Summary can be localized in .spec file [1], where
supposedly names in comps terminology refers to summary in
.spec
terminology. Including translations is
Dne 15.7.2015 v 12:21 Mathieu Bridon napsal(a):
On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 10:51 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 07/15/2015 10:20 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Description and Summary can be localized in .spec file [1], where
supposedly names in comps terminology refers to summary in
.spec
On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 12:53 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 15.7.2015 v 12:21 Mathieu Bridon napsal(a):
On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 10:51 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 07/15/2015 10:20 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Description and Summary can be localized in .spec file [1],
where
Vít Ondruch wrote:
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down
significantly)? I know that this will not happen from day to day, but I
see the comps just as an ugly workaround for missing weak dependencies,
which we have now.
Since your proposal to drop comps is based on an
On Tue, 2015-07-14 at 10:13 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down
significantly)? I know that this will not happen from day to day, but
I see the comps just as an ugly workaround for missing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down
significantly)? I know that this will not happen from day to day, but I
see the comps just as an ugly workaround for missing weak dependencies,
which we have now.
Vít
Dne 10.7.2015 v
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 14.7.2015 v 11:49 Neal Gompa napsal(a):
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com
mailto:vondr...@redhat.com vondr...@redhat.comwrote:
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down
significantly)? I know that this will not happen from day to day, but I see
the comps just as an ugly
Dne 14.7.2015 v 11:49 Neal Gompa napsal(a):
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com
mailto:vondr...@redhat.comwrote:
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down
significantly)? I know that this will not happen from day to day, but
I see the comps
On Tue, 2015-07-14 at 10:13 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down
significantly)? I know that this will not happen from day to day, but
I see the comps just as an ugly workaround for missing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Dne 14.7.2015 v 15:21 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Tue, 2015-07-14 at 10:13 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down
significantly)? I know that
On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:53:49 +0200
Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
...snip...
* The comps.xml groups also provide grouping for
logically-connected packages that do not map to weak dependencies
well. (For example: an astronomy group could pull in numerous
scientific packages
On Tuesday 14 July 2015 10:13:43 Vít Ondruch wrote:
Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down
significantly)? I know that this will not happen from day to day, but I
see the comps just as an ugly workaround for missing weak dependencies,
which we have now.
With all its
23 matches
Mail list logo
