| 1 |
On 06/22/2011 11:15 PM, Jesús J. Guerrero Botella wrote: |
| 2 |
> Symlinks are clean, and portage has |
| 3 |
> always been file-oriented so I see no problem with using them for |
| 4 |
> this. All we need is to deference the symlink to find the real name of |
| 5 |
> the package and put it in world instead of the symlinked name, so the |
| 6 |
> rest of packages won't even need to be retouched to fix the |
| 7 |
> dependencies. I don't really know if it's that simple as it sounds, |
| 8 |
> but it's an idea. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
For some reason, using symlinks to represent tags seems like an odd |
| 11 |
approach to me. I think it would be much more sensible to put them in |
| 12 |
metadata.xml or an ebuild variable. If for some reason you want symlinks |
| 13 |
representing the tags (I don't know why you would), you can always use a |
| 14 |
script to generate symlinks from metadata.xml files. |
| 15 |
-- |
| 16 |
Thanks, |
| 17 |
Zac |
Archives