| 1 |
>>>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, M J Everitt wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 17/10/16 08:41, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 4 |
>> To be clear I would suggest at MOST 3, -bin, -ebin, and -sbin. |
| 5 |
>> NO more. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> I don't see what problem you are trying to solve. Gentoo is a |
| 8 |
> source-based distro .. any binaries are a last-resort or most |
| 9 |
> certainly should be. Having a policy may be useful, but I see no |
| 10 |
> proposition on this thread yet? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
How about the following? I believe it is more or less the current |
| 13 |
practice: |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
"Gentoo usually builds its packages from source. Exceptionally, |
| 16 |
a binary package can be provided instead (e.g., if upstream doesn't |
| 17 |
provide a source) or in addition. Such packages should still follow |
| 18 |
normal naming conventions and don't need any special suffix. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
If a binary package is provided in addition to its source-based |
| 21 |
equivalent, the name of the former should be suffixed with '-bin' |
| 22 |
for distinction." |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Ulrich |
Archives