Re: [gentoo-dev] Need clear semantics for packages with binary entities

["Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn" <chithanh@gentoo.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

trupanka@gmail.com schrieb:
| I’m suffering from the fact that users can distinguish packages
| containing binaries just by eye. There is no mechanism to allow/ignore
| such packages.

| 7. to be continued... I guess
7. fonts which come precompiled instead of being built from source (e.g.
through fontforge)
8. artwork which is pre-rendered to bitmap formats but originally sourced
from vector graphics (e.g. KDE icons)
9. packages which download additional binary things later (Android SDK,
hplip depending on your printer)
10. documentation which is downloaded as PDF but not as DocBook/TeX/... sources
11. ... (I'm sure there are more)

| I wonder if Gentoo’s devs can do something with the problem. I think
| it’s problem in source-based Linux distribution.

I believe that Debian uses the term "preferred form for modification" to
describe/categorize their builds in that regard.


Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAlaEc1UACgkQ+gvH2voEPRCi6QCeNFoY/NWU0zXqf8B/F2tm1ZaB
y7QAni7MdYwoOQHn/1xQd8x2lsB5zc4n
=yQrF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----