Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2009, 19:01 +0200 schrieb Ulrich Mueller:
> >>>>> On Mon, 18 May 2009, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 18 May 2009 06:59:36 +0200
> > Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> AFAICS, there _is_ an ambiguity. You can have the following two
> >> ebuilds in the tree, simultaneously:
>
> >> ${PORTDIR}/app-misc/foo/foo-1a-scm.ebuild
> >> ${PORTDIR}/app-misc/foo-1a/foo-1a-scm.ebuild
> [Added some context back to your quotation of my posting.]
>
> > There's no ambiguity. It means what we define it to mean.
>
> Maybe it's possible to do that for dependencies, but VDB entries and
> binary packages for above two examples would still collide.
>
> So the conclusion still stands:
>
> >> The conclusion is that GLEP 54 in its current form is not
> >> implementable.
>
> Hyphens within PV are a Bad Thing, and we should really think about
> replacing the separator for "scm" by something else, like a period or
> an underscore. For example, the following two would be unique:
>
> ${PORTDIR}/app-misc/foo/foo-1a_live.ebuild
> ${PORTDIR}/app-misc/foo-1a/foo-1a-live.ebuild
you probably mean:
${PORTDIR}/app-misc/foo-1a/foo-1a.live.ebuild
but how would their vdb or binpkg names be unique?
vdb for example:
app-misc/foo-1a_live for app-misc/foo
app-misc/foo-1a_live for app-misc/foo-1a
am I missing something?
>
> With our current versioning scheme the rule is very simple: ${P} is
> split into ${PN} and ${PV} at the last hyphen. This can be done in a
> straight forward way by regexp matching, and I would really hate to
> lose this nice property.
I don't understand why this property is important. Can you please
explain?
--
Tiziano Müller
Gentoo Linux Developer, Council Member
Areas of responsibility:
Samba, PostgreSQL, CPP, Python, sysadmin, GLEP Editor
E-Mail : dev-z...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : F327 283A E769 2E36 18D5 4DE2 1B05 6A63 AE9C 1E30
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
