[gentoo-dev] package naming

[gentoo-dev] package naming

[Roy Marples]

Hi list.

I've been working on getting a Gentoo version of Debians resolvconf package 
into portage. It's basically a re-write of the internals (which I don't like) 
but the command line, setup and plugin system are 100% compatible (except for 
the plugins which may need one line changing). As such, I've credited the 
original author (Thomas Hood) and basically said this is a Gentoo re-write. 
It's all good to go and all dhcp clients in portage and openvpn have patches 
ready for its optional support. dhcp (dhclient) and ppp have already been 
patched in portage.

Now, if the commandline is the same, should the package name be the same? If 
so, what version number should I be using? It's currently just called 
resolvconf-0.1

Thoughts?

BTW, baselayout-1.12 has always had a resolv.conf management system, but that 
was coded on a per package basis - resolvconf allows each package to inject 
dns setup without being reliant on baselayout. So baselayout-1.12.0_pre17 
will be a fair bit lighter!

Thanks

-- 
Roy Marples <uberlord@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux Developer
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] package naming

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 411 bytes --]

On Monday 20 March 2006 18:42, Roy Marples wrote:
> Now, if the commandline is the same, should the package name be the same?
> If so, what version number should I be using? It's currently just called
> resolvconf-0.1
I would say gentoo-resolvconf as it's a rewrite/fork.

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] package naming

[Luca Barbato]

Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Monday 20 March 2006 18:42, Roy Marples wrote:
>> Now, if the commandline is the same, should the package name be the same?
>> If so, what version number should I be using? It's currently just called
>> resolvconf-0.1
> I would say gentoo-resolvconf as it's a rewrite/fork.
> 

why not having it implemented as eselect module? ^^;

lu
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] package naming

[Roy Marples]

On Monday 20 March 2006 17:59, Luca Barbato wrote:
> why not having it implemented as eselect module? ^^;

I am not familiar with eselect.
Also, I fail to see the benefit of using the eselect framework 
when /sbin/functions.sh provides what I need as a base.

Of course, feel free to talk me around.

-- 
Roy Marples <uberlord@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux Developer
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] package naming

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 783 bytes --]

On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 18:29 +0000, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Monday 20 March 2006 17:59, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > why not having it implemented as eselect module? ^^;
> 
> I am not familiar with eselect.
> Also, I fail to see the benefit of using the eselect framework 
> when /sbin/functions.sh provides what I need as a base.
> 
> Of course, feel free to talk me around.

I made a fork of hwdata for Gentoo's needs on the LiveCD and it is
hwdata-gentoo (to match hwdata-knoppix and hwdata-morphix for their
respective distributions).  I think it makes more sense to keep the
original package name first as it shows that it is a fork of that
package.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] package naming

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 484 bytes --]

Daniel Drake wrote:
> Roy Marples wrote:
>> Now, if the commandline is the same, should the package name be the
>> same? If so, what version number should I be using? It's currently
>> just called resolvconf-0.1
> 
> Definately change the name of the package (if not the script itself)
> otherwise the Debian resolvconf author wouldn't be too happy.

Or you could do something completely crazy like ask if the author's
interested in incorporating your rewrite.

Donnie


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: package naming

[Duncan]

Chris Gianelloni posted <1142881216.32640.14.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net>,
excerpted below,  on Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:00:15 -0500:

> I made a fork of hwdata for Gentoo's needs on the LiveCD and it is
> hwdata-gentoo (to match hwdata-knoppix and hwdata-morphix for their
> respective distributions).  I think it makes more sense to keep the
> original package name first as it shows that it is a fork of that
> package.

Agreed if keeping the old name with a gentoo prefix/suffix is chosen. 
However, nearly all Gentoo system tools are e<whatever> (not only portage
related either, as there's eselect), so I'd suggest eresolv.

Even if resolvconf-gentoo is chosen, I'd definitely recommend an eresolv
symlink, simply because doing so will allow it to be listed with
e<tab><tab>, if one forgets the name.

I recall back on Mandrake, reading the cooker discussion on their regret
at the naming convention they had chosen, <whatever>drake, for that very
reason -- no simple <prefix><tab><tab> method for listing all the Mandrake
system tools.  Gentoo has it right with the e* precedent.  I believe we
should continue to follow it.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] package naming

[Daniel Drake]

Roy Marples wrote:
> Now, if the commandline is the same, should the package name be the same? If 
> so, what version number should I be using? It's currently just called 
> resolvconf-0.1

Definately change the name of the package (if not the script itself) 
otherwise the Debian resolvconf author wouldn't be too happy.

resolvconf-gentoo would be a good choice

Daniel
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: package naming

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 427 bytes --]

On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 12:37 -0700, Duncan wrote:
> Agreed if keeping the old name with a gentoo prefix/suffix is chosen. 
> However, nearly all Gentoo system tools are e<whatever> (not only portage
> related either, as there's eselect), so I'd suggest eresolv.

He was referring to the *package* name.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: package naming

[Duncan]

Chris Gianelloni posted <1142886036.32640.16.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net>,
excerpted below,  on Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:20:35 -0500:

> On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 12:37 -0700, Duncan wrote:
>> Agreed if keeping the old name with a gentoo prefix/suffix is chosen. 
>> However, nearly all Gentoo system tools are e<whatever> (not only portage
>> related either, as there's eselect), so I'd suggest eresolv.
> 
> He was referring to the *package* name.

Uh... I think I was too sleepy or something.  =8^)

Thanks.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list