Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 11:17:49 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <netchild@FreeBSD.org> To: =?utf-8?b?S8O2dmVzZMOhbiA=?= =?utf-8?b?R8OhYm9y?= <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, emulators@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: The future of Gentoo ports Message-ID: <20060609111749.xl8dr4sq7ko8w80c@netchild.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <448937F5.4070607@t-hosting.hu> References: <448937F5.4070607@t-hosting.hu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting K=C3=B6vesd=C3=A1n G=C3=A1bor <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu> (from Fr=
i, 09 Jun =20
2006 10:57:25 +0200):
> My idea is to repocopy and rename these ports like:
> emulators/linux_base-gentoo-stage1 -> emulators/linux_dist-gentoo-stage1
Since you are introducing a new class of linux ports, I like to take =20
the opportunity to ask for a bikeshed color...
We have a mix of naming styles. linux-foo, linux_foo and =20
linux_foo-bar. Does it make sense to use an underscore here instead of =20
a minus sign? Should we read it as 'this is a "linux dist" port of =20
"gento" "stage1"', or should we read it as 'this is a "linux" port, it =20
is a "dist"ribution of "gentoo" "stage1"?
The former is some kind of semantic-view, that later is more like a =20
consistent naming scheme.
> This introduces a new group of ports (linux_dist*) that are complete
> linux environment for cross-development, etc. At the same time a
Sounds good.
> WITH_LINUXBASE macro should be added for installing them into
> ${LINUXBASE} and this requires a conditional CONFLICTS with another
> linux_base ports.
One of the first thoughts I had here is: via OPTIONS or not, what =20
would be better? And if using OPTIONS, is it possible to still use =20
CONFLICTS (evaluation order may be important here)?
But I think you will solve this problem. :-)
> If this has been accomplished, I also want to add then three metaports
> as emulators/linux_base-gentoo-stage[123] for the old functionality,
> this would install the ports with WITH_LINUXBASE set, but these
> metaports can be set DEPRECATED without an EXPIRATION_DATE to just note
> that the use of these are discouraged.
There should be a comment explaining it near DEPRECATED then, so that =20
a committer doesn't decides to axe those ports.
> Ideas and opinions from the lists are welcome!
Sounds good. The pkg-descr should be changed to a sensible explanation =20
then. I try to come up with a good one for the default linux base port =20
which mentions the differences compared to the linux_dist port then.
Bye,
Alexander.
--=20
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137
The kind of danger people most enjoy is
the kind they can watch from a safe place.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060609111749.xl8dr4sq7ko8w80c>