Gentoo Archives: gentoo-devhelp

From: Justin <justin@×××××××××.net>
To: gentoo-devhelp@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-devhelp] Writing ebuilds that replace others but with different name
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:38:33
Message-Id: 4ABBD8C1.5040003@j-schmitz.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-devhelp] Writing ebuilds that replace others but with different name by Nikos Chantziaras
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> I seem to have some fundamental "flaw" in portage. It seems I am not > able to write an ebuild that will in effect be able to replace another > one but with a different name. > > With RPMs, no matter how the RPM is named, it has "provides" data in it. > Is there some similar mechanism in portage? It seems to me that if the > name of an ebuild is changed, then *all* ebuilds depending on it will > have to change too. That looks like a PITA to me if it's true. > > For example, if I have an overlay that provides alternative/altered > packages of already existing ones in the portage tree, they will "clash" > with portage. Let's assume that my overlay provides an ebuild called > "foo-alt" which is a variation of a package in portage called "foo", but > is totally compatible with it. What I'm looking for is being able to > emerge "foo-alt", but have the ebuild state clearly that it provides the > "foo" dependency, so ebuilds depending on "foo" will be satisfied if > "foo-alt" is installed but "foo" isn't. > > Possible? > >
Thats's what virtuals are good for. As an example see virtual/jre. But in principle you are right. renaming a package is a headache and should really be avoided.

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-devhelp] Re: Writing ebuilds that replace others but with different name Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de>