[aps-devel] Fwd: GNU package management

[Robert Millan]

On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 11:49:17PM +0100, Wolfgang Jaehrling wrote:
> A few minor additions.
> 
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 11:20:24PM +0100, Wolfgang Jaehrling wrote:
> > However, I do not see a reason why we should not add an option to
> > UnionFS that makes it unite the _subdirectories_ of the directories
> > given at the command line, in which case it would have to cache the
> > contents of these to notice additions.
> 
> Of course, this has nothing to do with caching conceptionally;
> however, caching is implemented exactly in the same way.
> 
> > Or can you give me an example of a situation where it is useful to
> > have a _package_ actually override a part of another package?
> 
> Actually, if we want that nothing should be overriden, it is natural
> for the packages that contain the same file to conflict with each
> other.  If we want overriding, it is more complicated: Following the
> usual semantics of UnionFS, the first file would be used, which means
> that a) if we DON'T have a PackageFS at all, the package that
> overrides a part of the other package must come first alphabethically,
> which is ugly, but possible since we can just introduce the convention
> that packages that want to override a part of another package should
> have a name starting with (e.g.) an underscore character.  This is not
> a problem (and in fact, would be even helpful) if for every package
> that wants to override a part of another one, the whole _purpose_ is
> to do exactly that; it looks safe for me to assume that.  b) If we DO
> have a PackageFS, then it is no problem at all, since it can reorder
> the list of visible packages accordingly for UnionFS, which is
> possible if we use the mode of UnionFS that makes it unite the
> subdirectories, because then it reads the contents of what I called
> `list' in my previous mail.
> 
> Cheers,
> GNU/Wolfgang
>