Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Luke-Jr <luke-jr@×××××××.org>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Current portage well designed, but badly used
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:41:26
Message-Id: 200411280341.54536.luke-jr@utopios.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-portage-dev] Current portage well designed, but badly used by Gustavo Barbieri
1 On Saturday 27 November 2004 11:10 pm, Gustavo Barbieri wrote:
2 > Categories are mixed: there is a net-www/apache and net-www/mod_*
3 > (apache modules), but there is a more convenient category www-apache/
4 > for them. This is one example, there are more mistakes. There is any
5 > plan to fix them in next portage releases?
6
7 IIRC, net-www is an old category that should be www-* sometime in the future.
8 I believe this change was in a notice on the main site a while ago.
9
10 >
11 > Some packages use numbering version padded with zero, that's good to
12 > list with shell functions, but it's bad because you can't change them
13 > to numbers and them back to string. For example:
14 > mail-mta/nullmailer-1.00_rc7-r4. If you Convert it to integers, it
15 > becomes 1.0 and you can't map back to the ebuild.
16
17 Versions are *not* decimal numbers, but a set of three integers. Version 1.15
18 is a higher version than 1.2. It might be seen as nitpicking, but "integers"
19 generally always refers to a whole number (1 or 2, not 1.3 or 2.4)
20
21 >
22 > Portage provides metadata.xml, cool. But it's hardly used :(
23 > metadata.xml seems to provide tags for maintainers, changelogs and
24 > long description, many (most?) packages don't use them.
25
26 They should. It's a semi-gradual process.
27 --
28 Luke-Jr
29 Developer, Utopios
30 http://utopios.org/
31
32 --
33 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Current portage well designed, but badly used Gustavo Barbieri <barbieri@×××××.com>