Dan McGee wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2008 3:21 PM, Allan McRae <mcrae_allan@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nathan Jones wrote:
>>
>>> ++
>>> +In addition to packages, groups can be specified as well. For
>>> +example, `pacman -S gnome` will install every package in the gnome
>>> +group, as well as the dependencies of those packages.
>>>
>>>
>> Minor point, but since pacman has moved to being distribution agnostic,
>> do we want to mention specific package names or stick to "foo"? This
>> would look strange on a distro that didn't provide GNOME.
>>
>
> Valid point though, although I think real package names help people out.
>
> "For example, if gnome is a defined package group, pacman -S gnome will..."
>
> sound ok?
Yes. That is probably a better way to get around the issue.



_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

On Jan 8, 2008 3:21 PM, Allan McRae <mcrae_allan@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Nathan Jones wrote:
> > ++
> > +In addition to packages, groups can be specified as well. For
> > +example, `pacman -S gnome` will install every package in the gnome
> > +group, as well as the dependencies of those packages.
> >
> Minor point, but since pacman has moved to being distribution agnostic,
> do we want to mention specific package names or stick to "foo"? This
> would look strange on a distro that didn't provide GNOME.

Valid point though, although I think real package names help people out.

"For example, if gnome is a defined package group, pacman -S gnome will..."

sound ok?

_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev