| 1 |
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn posted on Wed, 25 Jul 2012 21:58:30 +0200 as |
| 2 |
excerpted: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Kent Fredric schrieb: |
| 5 |
>> On 23 July 2012 08:48, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina <zerochaos@g.o> |
| 6 |
>> wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> I do see some advantage of the current way of putting the |
| 8 |
>>> firmware in the category of what it is for... |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> If you wanted, you could do something like x11-drivers/ do , and have a |
| 11 |
>> standard of adding a little subcategorization: |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Could you be more specific? What does x11-drivers/ do that applies here? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
x11-drivers/xf86-video-ati |
| 16 |
x11-drivers/xf86-video-intel |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
x11-drivers/xf86-input-evdev |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
From his example: |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
sys-firmware/video-ati |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
... he's obviously referring to the middle "sub-category", |
| 25 |
-video- -input- etc. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
But your point about putting that in the category instead, thus having |
| 28 |
firmware-video, firmware-tv, firmware-sound, etc, instead of putting them |
| 29 |
all in sys-firmware, DOES make sense. For firmware-* categories that |
| 30 |
would otherwise just have a single package or two, there could be a |
| 31 |
firmware-misc, if category-proliferation is seen to be a big issue. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 35 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 36 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives