From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008101.html | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 102 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008101.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008101.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008101.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008101.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d87fff055 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008101.html @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Meeting tonight + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] Meeting tonight

+ Maarten Vanraes + alien at rmail.be +
+ Thu Sep 15 20:53:35 CEST 2011 +

+
+ +
Op donderdag 15 september 2011 16:12:11 schreef Thierry Vignaud:
+[...]
+> you're suggering to alter mgaupdate behaviour
+> however it just uses rpmdrake's code with an update flag.
+> So altering the former's behaviour will alter the later's behaviour
+> I don't want to be rude but that "I don't know" is exactly why
+> I'm warning from the beginning
+[...]
+
+I would think the cleanest solution would be to modify the behavior of the 
+update flag, to have only effect on the first level (ie: searching which packages 
+to update), but then internally remove the update flag when recursively getting 
+the dependencies of those.
+
+Of course, that would dig deep into the code and bugs and regressions are very 
+possible, that is true...
+
+I personally peeked into the code a bit, but unless we have someone who's very 
+knowledgable about this code, i don't think this would go safely...
+
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1