| 1 |
El mar, 28-04-2015 a las 11:07 +0200, Tobias Klausmann escribió: |
| 2 |
[...] |
| 3 |
> There is one corner case where that format is not enough: |
| 4 |
> multiple ebuilds/versions with non-homogenic archs, i.e.: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> cat-egory/packageA-1.2.3 amd64 x86 alpha |
| 7 |
> cat-egory/packageB-2.3.9 amd64 alpha |
| 8 |
> cat-egory/packageC-3.99 amd64 x86 ppc64 |
| 9 |
> cat-egory/packageD-10.2.5a alpha |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> The format I used here seemes to be slightly more common than |
| 12 |
> others and it is good enough for me™. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Any add-on prose should be _after_ the standardized bit. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Yeah, we also use that format for gnome stuff... anyway, I don't mind |
| 18 |
having a different option -> provide "list-${arch}" attachments with the |
| 19 |
concrete lists per arch :/ |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Any preference? |
Archives