[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress |
Date: |
Fri, 8 Apr 2005 15:22:06 -0700 (PDT) |
>> Always giving root the same tag means that many important control
>> files always have the same tag (using only generic rules for how those
>> tags are constructed).
> Uhm. All current files in Arch are either names tagged
> - ?[_]./path/to/file-or-dir
> or explictly id'd via external id files or in-file taglines.
> Unless I'm badly mistaken giving the root a different id has no effect
> on the ids of any other files.
Think more algebraicly:
The root and its id are a kind of `0'.
Given a directory id and a relative path from that directory
to a particular kind of control file, one can reliably construct
the id of that control file.
So, sure --- arch could assign a patch log file the same id it
currently does even if the root id could change. On the other
hand, the id of a patch log file can be computed using generic
algebra rules, given only its path relative to `0', the root directory.
People sometimes argue that it would be useful if one could "rename"
a subdir to be the root and the root to be a subdir. It is noteworthy,
though, that any such rename operations, to be valid in arch, would
*have to be* accompanied by a rename of the `{arch}' directory. In other
words, no matter what, the root directory is a special case.
Given that the root dir is always a special case, giving it a fixed
id (and thus avoiding to *ever* have to rename `{arch}'), is
actually something of a simplification.
-t
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, (continued)
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Aaron Bentley, 2005/04/03
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Robert Collins, 2005/04/04
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Aaron Bentley, 2005/04/04
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, David Allouche, 2005/04/05
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Aaron Bentley, 2005/04/05
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, David Allouche, 2005/04/06
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Aaron Bentley, 2005/04/06
- [Gnu-arch-users] BitKeeper drops gratis product, support for Linux kernel development, Andy Tai, 2005/04/06
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: BitKeeper drops gratis product, support for Linux kernel development, Catalin Marinas, 2005/04/06
Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Robert Collins, 2005/04/06
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress,
Tom Lord <=
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, John Arbash Meinel, 2005/04/08
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Tom Lord, 2005/04/08
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, John Arbash Meinel, 2005/04/08
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Tom Lord, 2005/04/08
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Robert Collins, 2005/04/08
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, John Arbash Meinel, 2005/04/08
- Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Robert Collins, 2005/04/08
Re: [GNU-arch-dev] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new documentation progress, Robert Collins, 2005/04/08