| 1 |
>>>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Let's also add -c for C programs, and -cxx for C++ programs. -py for |
| 4 |
> pure Python stuff, -cpy when stuff includes extensions compiled in |
| 5 |
> C, -cxxpy extensions in C++. We should also have special -x86asm |
| 6 |
> suffix for packages that rely on non-portable x86 assembly, or maybe |
| 7 |
> even -x86asm-sse when they use some fancy instruction sets. And then |
| 8 |
> don't forget to add a suffix for license, |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Yes please, let's add a -non-free suffix to all packages with a |
| 11 |
license outside of the @FREE group. ;) |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> for GUI library (because obviously nobody wants GTK+ software on KDE |
| 14 |
> systems, nor GTK+3 software on GTK+ systems). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
But seriously, what has become of the package tags proposal? It seems |
| 17 |
to me that it would fit some of the things suggested previously in |
| 18 |
this thread. |
| 19 |
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Antarus/Package_Tags |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Ulrich |
Archives