Agreeing on a UI for sandboxes
the.dead.shall.rise at gmail.com
Wed Sep 5 02:56:08 CEST 2012
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Mikhail Glushenkov
> <the.dead.shall.rise at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I looked more closely into this, and it seems like the easiest
>> solution is a --no-download flag for "install". It can be implemented
>> either by exiting with error if the install plan contains packages
>> that aren't already installed (forcing the user to run "install
>> --only-dependencies") or by somehow coaxing the constraint solver into
>> rejecting such packages (is this possible?).
> Would that be equivalent of configure && build && registering or are
> there some subtle differences. I'm worried that if there are builds my
> fail for confusing reasons.
Yes, it should be. The reason I want to use "install" is that the
sandbox can contain reverse dependencies of the add-source packages
which need to be updated when the add-source packages are rebuilt.
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
More information about the cabal-devel