This however, was quite insightful. Indeed Patrick shouldn't have to do this, which is what the first post was effectively asking of him. Glad that you see how unreasonable that was, especially given the (predictable) less than entusiastic response from the overwhelming majority of people commenting.

3 members found this post helpful.

You could do that but it would be a waste of time IMHO given the SalixOS team have done this for every single package in Slackware, already:

http://slackware.uk/salix/x86_64/slackware-14.2/deps/

Now some might disagree with the accuracy of some of those but only because that always happens when dependencies are discussed and any list you make would almost certainly suffer from the same types of disagreements.

So yeah… you would just be duplicating their work for no good reason and somehow you think it is reasonable for the rest of us to do the same, even if we think the whle concept was flawed to begin with?

I am sorry but I do not have that much spare time on my hands and have already wasted enough with my responses to this thread.

3 members found this post helpful.

It will never end. This is another of the famous “GoundHog day” Slackware posts where everyone will just repeat their point of view ad nausuem (myself included apparently).

Realisticly, I think that the only thing that is likely to kill this is when the insults get serious enough that the mods kill it and tell us all to never write about this stuff again, like the “lovely” systemd threads of the past.

God help us!

Oh, now it's a contest, is it?

What to write....what to write....

I want to ask the OP if he allows me to use this idea of "virtual sets" in a Slackware-derived distribution.

In other words, what are the legal agreements to use this idea?

Feel free to use the concept of those virtual sets (or groups) as you wish, if that is useful for you. No rights claim from my part.

And, welcome to LQ!

Thank you. Do you think it will work together with slapt-get?

In the sense that they will not disturb each other.

I do not see how can disturb the slapt-get operation this small patch which register a particular information in the associated package file.

Could be problems only if the slapt-get is already aware by "install/slapt-groups" files. Should be checked that.

From what I know, slapt-get does not use these files.

Then there should not be issues and slapt-get should work happily as usual.

Thank you.

You are welcome.