Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 09:12:14 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org> To: Mel Flynn <rflynn@acsalaska.net> Cc: Chris Rees <crees@FreeBSD.org>, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] UNIQUENAME patches Message-ID: <4FDEE2DE.2010408@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4FDE39DF.4090208@acsalaska.net> References: <4FD8AFEC.6070605@FreeBSD.org> <CADLo83-Pr5Qqa6oUFKmfbLuuDOCiDQoiLVvjPfvJ1fT8ou0h9g@mail.gmail.com> <4FDC9488.2010509@FreeBSD.org> <20120616145341.GK98264@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <4FDCA0FC.3050407@acsalaska.net> <20120616151125.GL98264@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <4FDE2195.7090901@acsalaska.net> <20120617195109.GA1274@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <4FDE39DF.4090208@acsalaska.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigACAFEB5F8F138863E061C8DB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 17/06/2012 21:11, Mel Flynn wrote:
>>> >> I really don't see what the problem is with setting uniquename to:=
>>> >> ${PORTORIGIN:S,/,__,}+${CHILDPORTNAME}
>>> >> or:
>>> >> databases/mysql55+server
>>> >> databases/mysql55+client
>>> >> etc.
>> > And so you want to forbid + as a character for PORTNAME? So you woul=
d need to
>> > fix all the ports having a + in the name.
> No. Ports all have a version starting with a minus sign, yet we have
> ports with a minus sign in it. This is the same principle. The plus or
> whatever char you pick, should be the first one from the right side
> after the version part. What's in between the plus and the start of
> version is subpackage/childport name.
Deciding what character or characters to use to distinguish the sub-port
part of the package name from the rest is a particularly bikeshedable
point. Virtually any of the punctuation on the keyboard could be used,
and it really won't make much difference in the end what gets chosen.
Personally I feel it should be the sole choice of the people that do the
work to implement sub-ports.
On the point of how UNIQUENAME should be defined, your arguments have
some merit, but I'm not convinced. On balance, after considering such
points I preferred what I came up with (but then I would say that,
wouldn't I?)
Cheers,
Matthew
--=20
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey
--------------enigACAFEB5F8F138863E061C8DB
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk/e4t4ACgkQ8Mjk52CukIxp+wCfd7jnyzLvX2Lkq01+CGIX/cUk
+WAAn0kK1iKq8Pbm8UvTYASbdgupmKFo
=v/5M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enigACAFEB5F8F138863E061C8DB--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FDEE2DE.2010408>