Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:16:59
Message-Id: 200509171614.38174.vapier@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal by Mark Loeser
1 On Saturday 17 September 2005 02:22 pm, Mark Loeser wrote:
2 > Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
3 > >> I would also like to see many of them, if not all, moved to the dev-cpp
4 > >>category:
5 > >
6 > > Is this bit really necessary?
7 >
8 > The reason for me adding that bit is the metadata from dev-cpp:
9 >
10 > The dev-cpp category contains libraries and utilities relevant to the
11 > c++ programming language.
12 >
13 > Now to me, that means I can find *all* relevant C++ stuff here. If we
14 > don't want that to be the case, maybe we should say "miscellaneous", but
15 > why should something be in dev-libs, as compared with dev-cpp?
16 > net-libs, I could understand, and dev-games, as those could be argued to
17 > have a direct relation.
18
19 for generic C++ packages (STLport/boost for example), i can see them being in
20 the dev-cpp category ... but for packages which have specific uses already
21 and arent in 'generic' categories, i dont think they should be moved
22 -mike
23 --
24 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal Mark Loeser <halcy0n@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal Christian Parpart <trapni@g.o>