Resending with JBJ's approval (and urging) since we had gone
PM without
noticing
Le Jeu 12 avril 2007 14:08, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit :
>
> Le Jeu 12 avril 2007 13:26, Jeff Johnson a écrit :
>
>> I can live with any syntax.
>
> /me cheers
>
>> There are two problems I can see:
>>
>> 1) Adding white space (and commas) breaks on older
rpmbuild parser.
>> Requires: perl(arch = i386)
>> will be parsed as "perl(arch' = "-386).
>
> not using whitespace, OTOH, tends to break the spec
writer brain parser
>
>> 2) There's confusion between existing
"perl(...)" markers
>
> then use N[ arch=i386 and version=X.7.Z ]
>
> I don't think people will terribly mind [] to denote a
condition, as long
> as you can do normal () grouping within it
>
> [...]
>> At this point its easier for me to implement
exactly what is
>> requested and move on to more important issues.
>
> This is not what you say in your other message.
>
>>> If you want to deprecate compact ambiguous
syntax please do it right.
>
>> What is "compact ambiguous syntax"
please?
>
> N.arch, which is used by third-party rpm-related tools
--
Nicolas Mailhot
_______________________________________________
Rpm-devel mailing list
Rpm-devel lists.dulug.duke.edu
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/rpm-devel
|
