Archives
Archives
| From: | "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@××××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Package file name requirement for binary ebuilds | ||
| Date: | Mon, 17 Oct 2016 07:41:51 | ||
| Message-Id: | assp.00988696d4.3833328.GfvnXTM8Ev@wlt | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Package file name requirement for binary ebuilds by Ulrich Mueller |
||
| 1 | On Monday, October 17, 2016 9:17:48 AM EDT Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 | > |
| 3 | > But seriously, what has become of the package tags proposal? It seems |
| 4 | > to me that it would fit some of the things suggested previously in |
| 5 | > this thread. |
| 6 | > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Antarus/Package_Tags |
| 7 | |
| 8 | That is interesting, but I think is aiming to solve a different problemt. Plus |
| 9 | it is not requiring any sort of policy that binary ebuilds end in -bin. Which |
| 10 | is the main idea. The rest was more icing. |
| 11 | |
| 12 | To be clear I would suggest at MOST 3, -bin, -ebin, and -sbin. NO more. |
| 13 | |
| 14 | -- |
| 15 | William L. Thomson Jr. |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Package file name requirement for binary ebuilds | "M. J. Everitt" <m.j.everitt@×××.org> |
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Package file name requirement for binary ebuilds | Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o> |