On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:40:27 -0800 "Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm for ranged licenses, but I think attention needs to be paid to the > syntax. The postfix [] form does nicely separate the version > information from the actual license name (moreso than the traditional > CPV atom), but the LGPL[>=2&<3] example looks to be overloading it, > when we already have AND/OR at the higher level. > LICENSE="|| ( Eclipse ( LGPL[>=2] LGPL[<3] ) )" > Which is, Eclipse OR (LGPL v2 up to, but not including LGPLv3).
The ( ) form means something else for package dependencies, and so can't
be used for ranged dependencies. In particular:
( >=foo/bar-3 <foo-bar/4 )
will (correctly) be matched if both foo/bar-5 and foo/bar-1 are
installed, which can happen due to slots.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
