[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: packaging system
From: |
Stefan van der Walt |
Subject: |
Re: packaging system |
Date: |
Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:04:31 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6i |
Hi Soren
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 12:26:14PM +0200, Søren Hauberg wrote:
> Introducing a toolbox field in DESCRIPTION doesn't make sense to as the
> package would then need to know which packages depends on it.
Why? There are a set set of toolboxes. Your package must just know
to which toolbox it contributes? The problem that we were discussing
earlier, is what happens when your package contributes to more than
one toolbox.
Anyway, I don't see it being a major hassle: include an INDEX file
with each package, and let Octave parse those index files whenever
someone wants help('toolbox'). We have the code to do so already.
Regards
Stéfan
- Re: packaging system, (continued)
- Re: packaging system, Stefan van der Walt, 2005/06/18
- Re: packaging system, Søren Hauberg, 2005/06/18
- Re: packaging system, Søren Hauberg, 2005/06/18
- Re: packaging system, Stefan van der Walt, 2005/06/18
- Re: packaging system, Søren Hauberg, 2005/06/18
- Re: packaging system, John W. Eaton, 2005/06/18
- Re: packaging system, Stefan van der Walt, 2005/06/18
- Re: packaging system, John W. Eaton, 2005/06/18
- Re: packaging system, Stefan van der Walt, 2005/06/18
- Re: packaging system, Søren Hauberg, 2005/06/19
- Re: packaging system,
Stefan van der Walt <=
- Re: packaging system, Søren Hauberg, 2005/06/19
- Re: packaging system, Stefan van der Walt, 2005/06/19
- Re: packaging system, Bill Denney, 2005/06/19
- Re: packaging system, Stefan van der Walt, 2005/06/20
- Re: packaging system, Søren Hauberg, 2005/06/20
- Re: packaging system, Stefan van der Walt, 2005/06/20
- Re: packaging system, Paul Kienzle, 2005/06/20
- Re: packaging system, Søren Hauberg, 2005/06/20
- Re: packaging system, Søren Hauberg, 2005/06/21
- Re: packaging system, David Bateman, 2005/06/22