On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 07:26:40AM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) > <zeeshanak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> 2. Modify the DB to reflect 'Derives' relationship as well as > >>> 'Upgrades' for many of the OSs, for example fedoraN both derives from > >>> and upgrades fedoraN-1. > >> > >> Do we really need that ? Or is it enough to just use the upgrades > >> information directly, in addition to the upgrades info. > > > > I guess you meant to write "upgrades information directly, in > > addition to the DERIVES info" ? I suggested this change because you > > said that upgrades does not imply support of the same devices as the > > OS being upgraded so don't think osinfo_os_get_all_devices() should > > recurse into 'upgrades'. > > So is my understanding correct here and you agree with my > suggestion? If so, I'll provide patches soon. Yep, i agree Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
