Pierre Labastie wrote: > Not sure it is helpful for what you want to do, but I have met some related > difficulties for the ablfs projects (extension of jhalfs to BLFS): > > Actually, some BLFS packages have added problems compared > to LFS (think of CDParanoia-III-10.2 or PSUtils-p17, for example).
I had thought about that, but didn't want to tackle it yet. > So I decided > to follow what the BLFS devs considered as being the name and the version > fields, > using what they put in general.ent: > There are <!ENTITY xxx-version "vvv"> fields which indicate what the dev had > in mind concerning version for package xxx. However, xxx is not the name > of the package, it is the id of the page in the xml book. You can then > retrieve > the name of the package from the xreflabel attribute in the sect1 tag. I've been using the wget-list and parsing that. That's not very difficult and it (usually) has the directory needed for searching for new packages. > Now, when fetching a tarball name from a repository, you may extract the name > and be left with the version, whatever it is. > > I have also an xsl template for comparing versions, which has not yet failed > for BLFS packages, but I have not tested all of them. And I do not like > very much what I have done, it is very convoluted... LOL. I was trying to stay away from new xsl. :) -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
