| 1 |
Doug Goldstein wrote: |
| 2 |
> Howdy all, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I just bumped into something I feel is a Portage and PMS bug. Since I |
| 5 |
> believe in concrete use cases, I'll just go with that. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Currently in the tree we have sys-fs/ntfs3g. However the proper upstream |
| 8 |
> name and name referenced in every single doc in the world is "ntfs-3g". |
| 9 |
> I tried to rename the package however, Portage does not let me since it |
| 10 |
> is invalid naming. marienz and genone informed me it's invalid with PMS |
| 11 |
> as well. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> The version I was trying to add is ntfs-3g-1.516. Logically Portage and |
| 14 |
> PMS should only consider any data after the LAST - as the version |
| 15 |
> information. Now in the cpv scheme of things, it's not undeterministic |
| 16 |
> because the following two entries would be the only valid entries: |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> sys-fs/ntfs-3g |
| 19 |
> =sys-fs/ntfs-3g-1.516 |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Either way, that's my beef. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
It seems my issue has been brought up in bug #174536 [1]. Sorry for the |
| 24 |
noise. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174536 |
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives