Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] PROPERTIES=virtual for meta-packages (clarification of definition)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:01:06
Message-Id: 48B2F35D.4080801@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] PROPERTIES=virtual for meta-packages (clarification of definition) by Michal Kurgan
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 Michal Kurgan wrote:
5 > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:01:48 -0700
6 > Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote:
7 >
8 >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
9 >> Hash: SHA1
10 >>
11 >> Hi everyone,
12 >>
13 >> Since there were some questions about ambiguity in the meaning of
14 >> the proposed PROPERTIES=virtual [1] value, we need to clarify it.
15 >>
16 >> [ ... ]
17 >>
18 >> Ebuilds that exhibit the "virtual" property commonly serve as a
19 >> layer of indirection in dependencies. All of the ebuilds in the
20 >> existing "virtual" category [4] should be eligible to define
21 >> PROPERTIES=virtual. If the ebuilds in the virtual category were the
22 >> only ones that exhibited this "virtual" property, then the
23 >> information that PROPERTIES=virtual represents could simply be
24 >> inferred from membership of that category. However, existence of
25 >> meta-packages in the "java-virtuals" category [5], among others,
26 >> makes it useful to introduce the "virtual" property as a means to
27 >> identify these ebuilds. Note that some packages, such as x11-libs/qt
28 >> [6], exhibit this property for some versions and not others. So, in
29 >> some cases it may be useful to be able to specify the "virtual"
30 >> property separately for different ebuild versions.
31 >>
32 >
33 > Wouldn't it be more appropriate to just move the "offending" ebuilds to
34 > virtual category? e.g. virtual/qt, etc.
35 >
36
37 A package move doesn't seem very practical given that the "virtual"
38 property varies from one version to the next. I suppose it could be
39 done as a split where older versions continue to exist as
40 x11-libs/qt and newer versions exist as virtual/qt. If we take that
41 approach then you'll have to convince the java team to combine the
42 whole java-virtuals category [1] into the virtual category. The same
43 goes for any other meta-packages such as kde-meta-* or whatnot.
44
45 [1] http://packages.gentoo.org/category/java-virtuals
46 >> - --
47 >> Thanks,
48 >> Zac
49 >
50
51
52 - --
53 Thanks,
54 Zac
55 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
56 Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
57
58 iEYEARECAAYFAkiy81wACgkQ/ejvha5XGaNqfACg0jO+/Tk6s7+wVxHJoBtO+guU
59 D3EAoKKs5LQbq+KDui8mJ/fVKyYf9N+v
60 =8Aaf
61 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies