[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Re: No xv?

From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Re: No xv?
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2010 02:51:57 -0500

    Another way is to define a list of suppressed packages,
    and set up apt-get so that it disregards anything that other packages
    say about those suppressed packages.

    This is easy and modular.

    imho, this path sets a future course of action that is better avoided: Other
    packages suffering the same issue would have to be hacked along in this

Do you mean, the list of suppressed packages might contain more than
one package name?  It certainly might, and that's why I suggested
making it a list.  The list could be stored in a file.  This seems
quite clean to me.

     and it could get bloaty or, I don't have precise knowledge about what
    the fix would imply, but could make the gNS version of apt unique (and
    therefore, incompatible).

It would mean making a small change in the code of apt.

Could you explain what "unique (and therefore, incompatible)" means?

    Although it is hard or time consuming to rebuild the packs, it'll be for the
    best, as it will fix the issue instead of patching it.

This solution is also fine, but it is more work.  If people are
reluctant to implement this solution because of the work, we should
also consider the easier solution I proposed.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]