From owner-freebsd-libh Tue Jun 19 12:38:28 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from imr2.ericy.com (imr2.ericy.com [12.34.240.68]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DE0C37B401; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:38:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Antoine.Beaupre@ericsson.ca) Received: from mr5.exu.ericsson.se (mr5att.ericy.com [138.85.92.13]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f5JJcRR05031; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 14:38:27 -0500 (CDT) Received: from noah.lmc.ericsson.se (noah.lmc.ericsson.se [142.133.1.1]) by mr5.exu.ericsson.se (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f5JJcJV08946; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 14:38:19 -0500 (CDT) Received: from lmc35.lmc.ericsson.se (lmc35.lmc.ericsson.se [142.133.16.175]) by noah.lmc.ericsson.se (8.11.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id f5JJcHG25946; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 15:38:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by lmc35.lmc.ericsson.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 15:38:16 -0400 Received: from lmc.ericsson.se (lmcpc100455.pc.lmc.ericsson.se [142.133.23.150]) by LMC37.lmc.ericsson.se with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NHB84XTK; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 15:38:10 -0400 From: "Antoine Beaupre (LMC)" To: John Baldwin Cc: Alexander Langer , Richy Kim , libh@FreeBSD.ORG, Will Andrews Message-ID: <3B2FAA21.4020307@lmc.ericsson.se> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 15:38:09 -0400 Organization: LMC, Ericsson Research Canada User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:0.9.1) Gecko/20010607 X-Accept-Language: en,fr-CA,fr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: packagetool.tcl References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG John Baldwin wrote: > On 19-Jun-01 Alexander Langer wrote: > >>Thus spake John Baldwin (jhb@FreeBSD.org): >> >> >>>It is modular enough (I think and hope) that one can simply "plug in" >>>another >>>package library at the bottom to support multiple package styles. >>> >>Do we want support for multiple package formats? >>Libh's format hasn't etablished yet and I wonder if it ever will. >>What do you think? I can focus on libh's current package format if >>people think it's worth it. > > I think it is worth it because there is actual code there. Yes. Also, as Will mentionned, OP does not have a lot done, and it's doing stuff more on a common ports dir anyways. > Also, for > transition purposes, it might be good to support the "old" package format we > currently have as well, thus if it abstracts packages somewhat so that it can > support multiple package formats, that would be very nice. I think supporting the old package format will somehow be mandatory, or it will create total panic. Anyways, the old package system is pretty simple and would be "upward compatible", AFAIK. It is also "extensible", somehow, so we could add @comments tag to reflect libh additional functionality, just as it was done with the ORIGIN tag. Just brainstorming here... > However, it also > needs to be finished sometime, so don't do it if it is too much work. Of course, we have to have an attracting-brand-new-look-at-my-car libh to make people actually *switch* to libh. ;) > Regardless, I would not axe its current package format for the time being. We > can change it to support OP later when OP is better defined. Yep. -- Antoine Beaupré Jambala TCM team Ericsson Canada inc. mailto:antoine.beaupre@ericsson.ca To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-libh" in the body of the message