1 |
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 21:21 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: |
2 |
> On Sunday 05 June 2005 21:03, Ned Ludd wrote: |
3 |
> > 14 files matching the pam prefix and 18 thing matching description. |
4 |
> You missed pam_ssh. And that's just an example. |
5 |
> By the way... mind telling everyone here how did you do that search? I still |
6 |
> feel that looking for pam things in a *single* place is more useful than |
7 |
> looking in many different places. |
8 |
I ran |
9 |
q search pam | grep -i -v SPAM |
10 |
and it took 0.665 seconds. Quite a bit faster than having to cd |
11 |
$PORTDIR and cd foo ; cd .. ; cd bar ; cd .. |
12 |
|
13 |
> If you feel that sys-auth is more logical, seems good to me. I haven't said |
14 |
> that it *must* be sys-pam.. was a proposal and as proposal is something I'd |
15 |
> like to discuss. |
16 |
|
17 |
Not really. |
18 |
We currently have about 138 categories and 19443 ebuilds in 9413 uniq |
19 |
package names. That's something like 68 on average packages per category |
20 |
with the addition 1 new category it only brings that |
21 |
average down to 67 things. I counted about ~20 PAM things in the entire |
22 |
tree which is less than one third of the global per package average |
23 |
category count. |
24 |
|
25 |
> > If you really feel you must invalidate everybody else binary trees |
26 |
> > and adding a workload on others for your gain then go for it. |
27 |
> For my gain? Wait I was talking of me in this case but it's not just me. |
28 |
|
29 |
Sure it is. You proposed it. You make reference of being the one that |
30 |
needs to fix things more than one time. |
31 |
|
32 |
> I think everyone which is looking for pam modules would like to search |
33 |
> something like sys-pam, instead of looking here and there on the tree or |
34 |
> trying to use some strange black-magic queries. |
35 |
> By the way, if you're looking for pam modules, your results are quite full of |
36 |
> cruft. |
37 |
|
38 |
No strictly all PAM listed in the description. |
39 |
If something was missing from the description then that given ebuild |
40 |
should be fixed to reflect it. |
41 |
|
42 |
> > But adding another category for what are clearly mostly system |
43 |
> > libraries does not make sense me in this case. |
44 |
> Currently sys-libs contains a very wide range of things, just a couple of them |
45 |
> seems to be strictly related. As I said, if you feel sys-auth is better, |
46 |
> good. That would probably take also other things like courier-authlib for |
47 |
> example. |
48 |
|
49 |
|
50 |
> But sys-libs doesn't seem the right place for me. |
51 |
|
52 |
Please hold off on the creation of any new categories till robbat2 |
53 |
and Azarah get a chance to comment, if they are for it I'll shutup. |
54 |
|
55 |
-- |
56 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> |
57 |
|
58 |
-- |
59 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |