On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 12:11 AM, David Brownell <davi...@pacbell.net> wrote: >> -It is better to name package openocd-0.4.0rc1.tar.gz than >> openocd-0.4.0-rc1.tar.gz, as there are some other system conventions >> that forbids using "-" and "_" mark after the program number (ie. >> "-devel" or "_n" for revision number n, etc).. > > Hmm, we're not really set up to have BSD-specific naming > conventions. It'll have to stay that way for now. You > can resolve that by downloading to a different filename.
Sorry for that David, I have found an elegant and formal way to deal with this kind of naming convention, so no constrains are necessary in future - my mistake :-) Soon I should also know if its possible to create openocd-devel port that could build and install the package straight from the GIT repository - this is a nice idea sparked by Xiaofan - so the testing could be even more simple, however if someone wants to develop the source code he/she will still need to use standard git repository procedure, so its purpose might be questionable. Also with GIT approach, the list of files for (de)installation might be a problem - usually it is a static thing, and with git build it will be dynamic so it can somehow leave trashes in the filesystem - some solution is to install all devel files with some specific prefix, ie. /tmp/devel/openocd so they can be easily removed without risking the integrity of the system... but I will try to find the solution. So is it sensible/worth to preape a port for this purpose, or assume that developer use git anyway? Best regards, Tomek Cedro -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
