> >From cfcaa50b83d6ce09a026e8275f19ce0665365e31 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> >2001
> From: Nagy Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 17:04:29 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] New sync070.py pactest
>
> This pactest tests the cooperation between front-end and back-end in
> case of "-S provision" ope
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Nagy Gabor wrote:
>> >From cfcaa50b83d6ce09a026e8275f19ce0665365e31 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
>> >2001
>> From: Nagy Gabor
>> Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 17:04:29 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] New sync070.py pactest
>>
>> This pactest tests the cooperation between front-end and bac
> > This pactest currently fails. It shows that the current "sync
> > addtarget" is quite messy. Most of the work (search for provision,
> > install group) is done in the front-end, some of the work done in the
> > back-end (interpret '/', avoid duplicated targets, and the
> > "conversion" from pmp
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Nagy Gabor wrote:
>> > This pactest currently fails. It shows that the current "sync
>> > addtarget" is quite messy. Most of the work (search for provision,
>> > install group) is done in the front-end, some of the work done in the
>> > back-end (interpret '/', avoid
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Nagy Gabor wrote:
> >> > This pactest currently fails. It shows that the current "sync
> >> > addtarget" is quite messy. Most of the work (search for provision,
> >> > install group) is done in the front-end, some of the work done in the
> >> > back-end (interpret
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Nagy Gabor wrote:
>>
>> If we handle everything (literal, provision, group) in the backend,
>> then it does not need to be configurable, does it?
>
> Well, with pacman front-end, you are right. But imagine a GUI, where the
> user selected some packages to install. In
