Re: more old stuff

2011-08-25 Thread Marc Espie
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:39:07PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > > Apparently, nobody cares about fat packages. > > > > Not surprisingly, killing that code simplifies a few things. > > Especially since the necessity of passing arch arou

Re: more old stuff

2011-08-24 Thread Landry Breuil
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:39:07PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > Apparently, nobody cares about fat packages. > > Not surprisingly, killing that code simplifies a few things. > Especially since the necessity of passing arch around was only due to > the possibility of fat packages... I don't see the

more old stuff

2011-08-24 Thread Marc Espie
Apparently, nobody cares about fat packages. Not surprisingly, killing that code simplifies a few things. Especially since the necessity of passing arch around was only due to the possibility of fat packages... Index: package.5 === R