-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 10:42:39 -0700
> Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote:
>> Some some sort of mapping of packages into sets space does seem
>> better than changing the behavior of these packages other cases.
>> However, PROPERTIES=set will still be useful for governing
>> recursion, since recursion into dependencies is probably not desired
>> for non-meta packages in the same sense that it might be desired for
>> meta-packages.
> 
> So you're saying that if a package depends upon all of foo, and a user
> wants to do a deep or empty tree reinstall, all of foo shouldn't get
> upgraded or reinstalled?
> 

No, that sort of behavior should be governed by various package
manager options. The primary purpose of PROPERTIES=set is only
differentiate packages that behave as package sets from those that
do not.
- --
Thanks,
Zac
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkjf7JsACgkQ/ejvha5XGaMF1gCfb599X9JM/8rvoOx0mLc5aMMm
PN0AoLOOOIewiZSey0O1/jA+lF2F22FV
=2xMK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----