1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|
2 |
Hash: SHA256
|
3 |
|
4 |
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 00:26:41 -0700
|
5 |
Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote:
|
6 |
|
7 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
8 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
9 |
> |
10 |
> On 08/16/2011 12:01 AM, Micha? Górny wrote: |
11 |
> >>> Considering the number of different virtuals in this category, |
12 |
> >>> maybe it would be a good idea to split it a little? What I'm |
13 |
> >>> proposing is maybe creating some kind of '*-virtual' categories. |
14 |
> >>> |
15 |
> >>> For example, half of the current virtuals are prefixed with |
16 |
> >>> 'perl-'. Maybe they could be transformed into 'perl-virtual/*'? |
17 |
> >> |
18 |
> >> If you're going to do that, then I'd suggest giving them some sort |
19 |
> >> of tag that the package manager can rely upon in order to identify |
20 |
> >> them as virtuals. For example, we could have the ebuilds set |
21 |
> >> PROPERTIES=virtual [2], or we could simply specify (in PMS) that |
22 |
> >> any category whose name matches the '*-virtual' pattern will |
23 |
> >> contain virtuals. |
24 |
> > |
25 |
> > Doesn't DEFINED_PHASES==- serve that purpose nowadays? |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Actually, since EAPI 4 we have default src_install, so it's possible |
28 |
> to have ebuilds that have no defined phases but still install stuff. |
29 |
|
30 |
+ empty SRC_URI? I guess something like the workdir fallback conditions
|
31 |
in PMS.
|
32 |
|
33 |
- --
|
34 |
Best regards,
|
35 |
Michał Górny
|
36 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
37 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
|
38 |
|
39 |
iJwEAQEIAAYFAk5KHv8ACgkQfXuS5UK5QB0PbgP9GupYR9x+mTGrLfGeGeNH5qE9
|
40 |
RfkK1N4lLyU+yaekwEVpAWlQlRfm7Fi/p7kjsDF9sOCQ3QHJhtLv2kCdDrwmucAr
|
41 |
lnNKgz48bHn9CDc+zdBHlTox8ll93vwVEIxL5+gEgZK67RD6Z6Of+yVSrGJPVgQi
|
42 |
UqSEvRk8HbyLD3Tdg8g=
|
43 |
=jaP+
|
44 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |