1 |
I seem to have some fundamental "flaw" in portage. It seems I am not |
2 |
able to write an ebuild that will in effect be able to replace another |
3 |
one but with a different name. |
4 |
|
5 |
With RPMs, no matter how the RPM is named, it has "provides" data in it. |
6 |
Is there some similar mechanism in portage? It seems to me that if |
7 |
the name of an ebuild is changed, then *all* ebuilds depending on it |
8 |
will have to change too. That looks like a PITA to me if it's true. |
9 |
|
10 |
For example, if I have an overlay that provides alternative/altered |
11 |
packages of already existing ones in the portage tree, they will "clash" |
12 |
with portage. Let's assume that my overlay provides an ebuild called |
13 |
"foo-alt" which is a variation of a package in portage called "foo", but |
14 |
is totally compatible with it. What I'm looking for is being able to |
15 |
emerge "foo-alt", but have the ebuild state clearly that it provides the |
16 |
"foo" dependency, so ebuilds depending on "foo" will be satisfied if |
17 |
"foo-alt" is installed but "foo" isn't. |
18 |
|
19 |
Possible? |