| 1 |
On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 10:17 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2) ebuild maintenance will be a nightmare- every new version will |
| 3 |
> require again walking the source to see if the lines you've drawn for |
| 4 |
> dividing the source are still proper. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
This is another good point. I have two split packages that I maintain. |
| 7 |
They are ut2004{,-data,-bonuspack-ece} and kudzu/libkudzu. In my case, |
| 8 |
the distinctions are actually quite easy, as ut2004-data pulls from the |
| 9 |
CD, ECE pulls from a distfile (or the CD, with lots of detection-fu), |
| 10 |
and ut2004 is an actual package of the latest patch files, not a |
| 11 |
meta-package. As for kudzu/libkudzu, the kudzu Makefile already has |
| 12 |
this distinction built-in, so I don't have to maintain it myself. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I'd see no problem with this in mysql, if, for example, mysql's Makefile |
| 15 |
had a "make libmysqlclient" target. In that case, I would make it a |
| 16 |
separate package. This would also mean a lot of work on your part, as |
| 17 |
every single package that had a dependency on mysql would now need some |
| 18 |
way of specifying whether the server was going to be local or remote, to |
| 19 |
properly *DEPEND on the correct package. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
All in all, I think it isn't worth even attempting at this time. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> Short version, control what gets installed via use flags, but don't |
| 24 |
> introduce it until use deps are available in a stable portage. |
| 25 |
> Breaking the beast up now is short sighted since use deps are |
| 26 |
> already implemented in the core rewrite. Yes, waiting is a pain in |
| 27 |
> the ass, but the work to break it up and continue to indefinitely |
| 28 |
> force subpackaging on an package isn't worth it. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Agreed. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 34 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager |
| 35 |
Games - Developer |
| 36 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives