On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 15:43 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Peter Jones <pjones <at> redhat.com> writes: > > How do you plan on discovering this data? During installation, > > basically everything is the latter, or equivalent, except for packages > > selected individually in a ks.cfg . > > Well, I'd say (for an interactive install) everything with a checkmark next to > it (no matter whether that's because it's part of defaults of a selected group > and hasn't been unchecked or because it has been checked explicitly) is > "explicitly installed". Everything else (which either is not listed as an > explicit option at all or was unchecked, but had to be pulled in anyway as a > dependency) is "automatically installed". So that basically means that you want to mark everything which is listed in comps but isn't in "base" or "core" as user-installed. That's going to result in a view of "safe to remove" that doesn't reflect what users want or expect. > (Of course, that requires cooperation from the installer and from RPM. If the > flags are kept track of only by some higher-level app like aptitude, then > marking everything installed at install time "explicitly installed" is the only > option, and apparently that's what aptitude does.) I think that's the only way to actually behave conservatively enough to match user expectations. I also think it stinks. -- Peter -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
