Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 20:37:35 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> To: Julien Laffaye <jlaffaye@freebsd.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [ECFT] pkgng 0.1-alpha1: a replacement for pkg_install Message-ID: <4D9218DF.8060305@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=uPaaxUVUDL3CPWByOeOZ2TjziUbrY7pJLQyAa@mail.gmail.com> References: <20110325101111.GA36840__48943.3474642739$1301049771$gmane$org@azathoth.lan> <4D90C8EA.2000901@freebsd.org> <AANLkTinaz9Y6kgjQvdS1Pu%2Bkay50DUs6FubcbCxcc3W2@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=uPaaxUVUDL3CPWByOeOZ2TjziUbrY7pJLQyAa@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 28/03/2011 21:22 Julien Laffaye said the following: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Garrett Cooper <gcooper@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> III. Package naming that includes architecture, major OS version (for API/ABI), >>> maybe more. >> >> This could be provided in the manifest. Doing it in the filename sort >> of turns into a mess, as I've discovered working at Cisco :). >> > > Actually, it *is* in the +MANIFEST of pkgng packages archives :-) Well, by the package name I meant not only a package file name. Let's imagine that we do support installing i386 packages on amd64 in parallel to amd64 packages. And for some reason I want to have both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of, say, firefox; e.g. for benchmarking. If the packages would have the same name, then that would be impossible. I think that having some thing in package name in addition to package metadata could have certain benefits. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D9218DF.8060305>