Did i just made the fastest dependency checker in the world? (198 packages in 1.5 seconds)

[Mark]

would it work if i predefine all versions in another table (or column) in
the way that rpm does it? that way i don`t lose any speed and i`m still
compatible with yum ^_^ sounds like a wondefull solution to me.

only problem left is how to deal with things like: 1.1b2 or 1.1stable
or do i need to convert the b and stable things to numbers but in a unique
way so that it doesn`t effect the rpm version stuff?

sample:

a = 001100
b = 002200
c = 003300

stable = 011110
unstable = 022220

or i can imagine that rpm gets stucg again if it founds a version like this:
1.b2
cause if i`m right rpm will see that (if i do my cenvertion) as:
1.002200 = 1.22 ?

would this work?



2007/4/11, seth vidal <skvidal at linux.duke.edu>:
>
> On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 19:55 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> > > This isn't really a issue for fedora core development list, well,
> until
> > > >you have a drop in replacement for yum (which might be a little while
> > > >off I think).
> >
> > I don't think the above is quite fair -- developing tools for Fedora is
> > certainly on topic. Even for non-advanced programmers.
> >
>
> +1.
>
> Alternative depsolvers and discussion on how we should be doing that
> should definitely happen here or on other package-mgmt-related lists.
> However, a fair bit of this discussion would be best suited by various
> parties reading about rpm's  version comparison and yum's dependency
> resolution methods before commenting on their virtue or vice.
>
> -sv
>
>
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070411/c520305f/attachment.htm>