On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 08:20:28PM +1300, Nigel Stanger wrote: > Darian Lanx at [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake thus: > > > On a second note I think (%type[nox] "") is not such a hot syntax, > > It just confuses me. Is that supposed to be an "equals" constraint? If so, > why not just say so and make it clear rather than leaving the package > creator guessing? > > There are plenty of widey-used, well-known and well-understood expression > syntaxes around, I don't see why we should invent a new and obscure one :)
#fink had similar thoughts this afternoon (I think you had already left, dmalloc:( including that comparisons would be nice and that we already have comparison syntax in the parens after a package name for versioned dependencies, so why not before also. Which brings us to: Depends: (thing1 op thing2) package Depends: (thing) package The two things are compared according an operator (one of: << >> == != <= >=). As an alternative we could also have the latter case which checks for thing being non-null (or some "true" enum). dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
