Mathieu Lirzin (2015-12-23 00:23 +0300) wrote:
[...]
> In fact I think that having the same character for separating words and
> version is a design flaw.
Wow, I didn't think about it before. And I totally agree!
> This brings non desirable limitations when
> choosing a package name (as shown i
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
>
>> The test case contains the example "guile-2.0.6.65-134c9" which
>> invalidates my proposal. Here is another idea which identifies the
>> version part by the presence of dots. WDYT?
>
> Sometimes the version part does not cont
Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
> The test case contains the example "guile-2.0.6.65-134c9" which
> invalidates my proposal. Here is another idea which identifies the
> version part by the presence of dots. WDYT?
Sometimes the version part does not contain dots, as in “diffoscope-34”.
Here’s the compl
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
>
>> I had the same issue when trying to create a package named
>> 'rxvt-unicode-256-color'. I have tried to fix
>> ‘package-name->name+version’ by matching the last hyphen and check if
>> the next character is a number.
>
> Sounds
Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
> I had the same issue when trying to create a package named
> 'rxvt-unicode-256-color'. I have tried to fix
> ‘package-name->name+version’ by matching the last hyphen and check if
> the next character is a number.
Sounds like a reasonable approach (better than what I su
Hi,
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Andreas Enge skribis:
>
>> I think we need a more sophisticated mechanism for separating package names
>> and versions, such as this:
>> - Try the compete string as a package name.
>> - If it does not exist, treat the part after the last dash as a ver
tag 19219 patch
thanks
Andreas Enge skribis:
> I think we need a more sophisticated mechanism for separating package names
> and versions, such as this:
> - Try the compete string as a package name.
> - If it does not exist, treat the part after the last dash as a version and
> the part before
Trying to rename the font-adobe100dpi package to font-adobe-100dpi
(which is the correct name given our font conventions and even before),
I noticed the following problem:
guix build font-adobe-100dpi
looks in vain for a version 100dpi of the package named font-adobe.
The problem only occurs with d
