Re: [gentoo-dev] Package file name requirement for binary ebuilds

[Ulrich Mueller]

>>>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Michał Górny wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:20:19 +0200
> Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:

>> "Gentoo usually builds its packages from source. Exceptionally,
>> a binary package can be provided instead (e.g., if upstream doesn't
>> provide a source) or in addition. Such packages should still follow
>> normal naming conventions and don't need any special suffix.

> I think this contradicts the next paragraph. The 'or in addition' is
> followed by a statement that it doesn't need any special suffix.

Good catch. Strike "or in addition" from the second sentence.

>> If a binary package is provided in addition to its source-based
>> equivalent, the name of the former should be suffixed with '-bin'
>> for distinction."

> I think this could collide with Chrome vs Chromium. One could call
> Chromium a 'source-based equivalent' of Chrome, and therefore require
> the '-bin' suffix even though the names do not collide.

Hm, s/for distinction/if necessary for distinction/ ?

Ulrich