On Nov 10, 2007 6:33 AM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
2007/11/10, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
On Nov 9, 2007 4:10 PM, Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@frugalware.org> wrote:
and finally one more argument for the current implementation: several times i had a hdd crash when parts of the pacman db was affected during fsck. and it was easy to solve. pacman -Qt, it printed 3 packages, reinstall, and you're ready. afaik none of the single-file implementations have this advantage
I know. I really like the plain text approach. It's very elegant. Maybe using something similar to git's packs may help us here. I will look into it.
I'd like to resurrect this thread: http://archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2007-April/008163.html (even older is here: http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2006-March/005702.html)
Those are totally unrelated.... I mean, they're important, sure, but they're not what we're talking about here.