From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HoTFO-0006dO-3D for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 16 May 2007 23:49:34 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l4GNmZtr020278; Wed, 16 May 2007 23:48:35 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l4GNkeWi018086 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 23:46:41 GMT Received: from lappy-iii.pioto.org (host-24-225-181-179.patmedia.net [24.225.181.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3795564C87 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 23:46:40 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 19:45:08 -0400 From: Mike Kelly To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages with same name was -> Conversion of Emacs virtual packages Message-ID: <20070516194508.3dbc0b23@lappy-iii.pioto.org> In-Reply-To: <200705170037.26212.bangert@gentoo.org> References: <17993.36648.37167.198946@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <1179346063.7620.4.camel@workbox.quova.com> <1179350638.22964.15.camel@wlt.obsidian-studios.com> <200705170037.26212.bangert@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.9.1 (GTK+ 2.10.9; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: cc1755f7-3b70-4c44-a617-03635f7d610d X-Archives-Hash: c30f86dad6cb2bbbffd2d12720ce747c On Thu, 17 May 2007 00:37:23 +0200 Thilo Bangert wrote: > > > It isn't different. That's the problem. If you have two packages > > > with the same name, you have the same problem. > > > > On that note I would hope the vim/vi peeps would rename. > > app-vim/ant > > and app-vim/sudo That's getting the axe in a few weeks. > > IMHO app-vim/ant should really be app-vim/vim-ant or something other > > than just ant. > > or app-vim/sudo-syntax and app-vim/ant-syntax as there already are a > number of ebuilds following that scheme... Well, sudo and ant aren't syntax plugins, so that wouldn't make any sense. Also, we're keeping the same names that the upstream script writers use, just as we do everywhere else in Gentoo. The whole point of having category names is so that we can have two packages w/ the same name and not have issues. -- Mike Kelly -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list