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 1HwM4p-0003IF-ML for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:47:16 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l57HjKRi005032; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 17:45:20 GMT Received: from mail.genone.homeip.net (dslc-082-082-179-117.pools.arcor-ip.net [82.82.179.117]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l57HhMYX002706 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 17:43:22 GMT Received: by mail.genone.homeip.net (Postfix, from userid 460) id 2189D281CA; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 19:42:39 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8-gr0-genone_0.7 (2007-02-13) on lyta.genone.homeip.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=7.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.8-gr0-genone_0.7 Received: from sheridan (sheridan [192.168.0.40]) by mail.genone.homeip.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 548612811E for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 19:42:37 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 19:42:45 +0200 From: Marius Mauch To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Version Naming Clarification Message-Id: <20070607194245.9b469b5d.genone@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <46683328.6010708@gentoo.org> References: <46680E94.2080705@gentoo.org> <46683328.6010708@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.1 (GTK+ 2.10.11; i686-pc-mingw32) 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: 3be38c2b-ad4a-4333-9f4e-0eb72eded093 X-Archives-Hash: 09645f7dc729f69ee65fd8a81d2596d9 On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:32:40 -0400 Daniel Drake wrote: > Doug Goldstein wrote: > > Currently in the tree we have sys-fs/ntfs3g. However the proper > > upstream name and name referenced in every single doc in the world > > is "ntfs-3g". I tried to rename the package however, Portage does > > not let me since it is invalid naming. marienz and genone informed > > me it's invalid with PMS as well. > > > > The version I was trying to add is ntfs-3g-1.516. Logically Portage > > and PMS should only consider any data after the LAST - as the > > version information. > > Would this cause problems anywhere if we had the following? > > sys-fs/ntfs/ntfs-3g.ebuild > and > sys-fs/ntfs-3g/ntfs-3g-1.516.ebuild Thing is: if you see sys-fs/ntfs-3g, is that an atom or a CPV? You don't know unless you actually check the tree. Marius -- Marius Mauch -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list