Re: [gentoo-dev] how CVS ebuilds are managed

[Abhishek Amit]

On 14:21 Tue 29 Apr     , Robert Thomas wrote:
> Instead of having a separate package for a cvs version of a package, why
> not consider the cvs version to be the latest version of a package, but
> always marked unstable? Since the cvs version of a package usually
> overwrites the existing version, the old version should be automagically
> unmerged. For example, in the case of gaim and gaim-cvs, if the cvs
> version of gaim is installed, the stable version should be unmerged as
> if it was an old version of the package. Perhaps there is another way to
> manage this.
> In the case of binary packages (like openoffice-bin), they should also
> be considered to be the same package, but still kept separate in some way.
> Perhaps another USE flag?
> # USE="bin" emerge openoffice
>
> Or maybe cvs could be a new keyword:
> # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="cvs" emerge gaim
>
> Ok, I really am talking out of the wrong orifice here, and I know that
> these ideas are probably a misuse of USE flags and KEYWORDS. I would
> just like to know if something like this could work (not necessarily the
> way I've described it, perhaps a different extention to the version
> calculating routine altogether), or if there is a reason these packages
> are managed the way they are (by "these" I mean all packages ending in
> "-bin" or "-cvs").
>
> --
> Cicero (Robert Thomas)
> CS Major @ GA Tech
> Email: rwt@×××××××××.edu
>
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
>
I don't even think this is really important, as cvs ebuilds are meant to
be sued sparingly(only when the release version is really old, as gaim
was and I'm sure there are some other critereia that can be used).
gaim-cvs is depreacted now. Perhaps it is just me, but I really don't
see the point in adding mroe features to prtage for three or four
packages.


--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list