From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4818 invoked by uid 1002); 16 Apr 2003 00:26:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 30399 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2003 00:26:03 -0000 From: Dave Nellans Reply-To: dnellans@cs.utah.edu To: George Shapovalov Cc: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200304151711.23346.george@gentoo.org> References: <1050450162.18807.6.camel@malfus> <20030415231617.GA27283@cerberus.oppresses.us> <1050451387.18805.17.camel@malfus> <200304151711.23346.george@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-TmyHxDC+CdQrl+RzaNtb" Organization: none Message-Id: <1050454731.18808.32.camel@malfus> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4- Date: 15 Apr 2003 18:58:52 -0600 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild naming policy X-Archives-Salt: 11fd3fd7-9913-40d6-a52c-bd63bf46e331 X-Archives-Hash: 3104c4fc04095e1005c569287e325c4e --=-TmyHxDC+CdQrl+RzaNtb Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ah yes, it was the bad guy George who renamed the balsa package tbass ;) I agree that its quite nice to have package naming not require the category and that it should stay that way. I'd like to see multiple names be allowed, and to install the others of the same name you just have to use the category as well. This makes the common operation of emerge -s return all packages you might be searching for, which i see as a major disadvantage of not allowing multiple same named ebuilds. The question then remains is how to determine which package is the "default" to be installed if you use only the ebuild name. I haven't poked in the code to see how portage is doing it now, but can see three possible options. One being alphabetical by category, two being first come first serve, or three allowing the "most commonly installed" of the options defined by whomever is maintaining the package(s). The only downside is that portage/ebuilds will need yet another thing added to it similar to SLOTS to help support this =3D/ my 2 cents dave On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 18:11, George Shapovalov wrote: > Hey Dave. >=20 > I feel your pain ;), I was the one responsible for the package, so I thin= k I=20 > need to do some discussion/explanation here. > While I myself sympathise to the more structured approach and would wellc= ome=20 > distinguishing packages by categories, the sad truth is that portage does= not=20 > seem to be very consistent even with itself, as Fred Van Andel pointed ou= t. >=20 > Now, not so sad truth :) > I just wanted to point out, that originallly portage was category-sensiti= ve,=20 > and you *had* to specify categiry while emerging the package. The change = was=20 > made quite consciousnessly, as this feature (of being able to drop catego= ry)=20 > was quite requested one (if memory serves me well). Heck, I even catch my= self=20 > now and then enjoing not to have to type too much :).=20 > Of course the change has implications, that certain category treatment is= not=20 > followed, which can lead to the problems, some of which (albeit minor at = this=20 > point) were emphasized. > As for the existance of two ocaml's: the thing is that this did not becom= e a=20 > strict policy, while it probably should have, and the developer in questi= on=20 > might not have known about it.=20 >=20 > Thus I would like to use your request as a bait for other developers and = users=20 > to discuss the issue and decide whether we should "officialize" this poli= cy=20 > (of not having equivalently named ebuilds under different categories) or=20 > should we do something else. However IMHO leaving this as "unofficial" po= licy=20 > may hart in the long run... >=20 > George >=20 >=20 > On Tuesday 15 April 2003 17:03, Dave Nellans wrote: > > Is that true? > > > > my very scientific test of doing emerge -p ocaml on several machines > > returns that dev-lang/ocaml would be installed on every one. this woul= d > > seem there is at least "some" mechanism defining which one is returned, > > even if its as silly as being alphebetical by by category name or ?? > > > > thanks for the link to the ebuild naming policy chris. it doesn't > > address this issue though of multiple ebuilds having the same name if > > they are in different categories. anyone have thoughts on how this > > should be done from a technical or user standpoint? i think from a use= r > > standpoint it makes more sense to allow multiple ebuilds with the same > > name because then a user searching for them will have both returned > > (even if they have to user the category/ebuild to get that particular > > one to install) > > > > dave >=20 >=20 > -- > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list --=20 --=-TmyHxDC+CdQrl+RzaNtb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA+nKrKdtkLPRim+bkRAuWPAKCCpTwVUkkNVmkqoy8i4n69Q7lNAwCfflik 01l0wQm6jhIxI5laexrSCzk= =tPMu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-TmyHxDC+CdQrl+RzaNtb--