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.