| 1 |
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
>>>>>> On Fri, 2 Dec 2016, Mike Gilbert wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> The devmanual states: |
| 5 |
>> The name section should contain only lowercase non-accented letters, |
| 6 |
>> the digits 0-9, hyphens, underscores and plus characters. Uppercase |
| 7 |
>> characters are strongly discouraged, but technically valid. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
>> https://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/file-format/index.html |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>> Why are uppercase characters strongly discouraged? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
>> Wouldn't it make sense to follow upstream's naming convention? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> No, because even for the most common packages it would be hard to |
| 17 |
> guess what the actual convention is. For example, is it GCC (used on |
| 18 |
> its web page and in documentation) or gcc (name of the command and |
| 19 |
> displayed by gcc --version)? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
As a developer I would tend to match the tarball naming to minimize |
| 22 |
the amount of customization needed in SRC_URI and avoid having to |
| 23 |
redefine S. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> If we allow uppercase, then should we also allow two packages in the |
| 26 |
> tree whose names differ only in character case? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Do we prohibit this currently? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Anyway, this seems like a pretty unlikely thing to have happen. |
Archives