| 1 |
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 01:11:00 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò" |
| 2 |
<flameeyes@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
| On Friday 10 February 2006 00:50, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
| > Provision should be made for future ports that require more than two |
| 5 |
| > keywords. There's no particular reason to artificially limit this to |
| 6 |
| > two at this stage. |
| 7 |
| |
| 8 |
| There's a reason: simplicity. More than two part keywords simply are |
| 9 |
| difficult to read, handle and are proving themselves pointless. |
| 10 |
| We just need to identify an operating system (or a variant of it) not |
| 11 |
| a whole complex of dependencies. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Mmm. Do you consider the cost of slightly simplified wording in the |
| 14 |
GLEP now to be worth extra effort that may be required in the future by |
| 15 |
some especially whacked out port? I'd prefer to see at least a note in |
| 16 |
the GLEP stating that three part keywords are legal if they ever become |
| 17 |
necessary. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
| > Examples of how this lot is to be used in DEPEND= etc would be good |
| 20 |
| > for clarity. |
| 21 |
| |
| 22 |
| Hmm well they are already being used, anyway, the following comes |
| 23 |
| from rpm2targz: |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Yeah, *I* know how they work. I suspect that many people reading the |
| 26 |
GLEP, however, are going to go "Huh? Why do we need this lot at all?". |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
| > You should clarify the env map behaviour when multiple matches all |
| 29 |
| > occur (first match, last match or merge?). |
| 30 |
| |
| 31 |
| Never thought about that actually, good point. I think last match |
| 32 |
| would be good. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Then your example code is wrong :) |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) |
| 38 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 39 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives