| 1 |
* Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Ah, but you see, in half the cases there is not a /complete/ |
| 4 |
> incompatibility. PHP4<->5 migration is not an entirely big switch, |
| 5 |
> the biggest problem IIRC in the 4->5 change is the way it handles |
| 6 |
> classes, and a lot of code 'simply works' on both. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I had to do a lot at that front. Believe me, they're NOT compatible. |
| 9 |
Just nearly compatible. So different. |
| 10 |
For those packages where it really doesnt matter, we simply could |
| 11 |
use an virtual. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Sama for java. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
<snip> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> In the case of autoconf, im personally glad it all hides under one |
| 18 |
> non-linear space-time-continumum on my harddrive ;) . The thought of |
| 19 |
> them all being in seperate ebuild names would drive me nutty ( folder |
| 20 |
> with 10 different package names for the same thing = wtf? ) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
What "folders" are you tallking about ? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
<snip> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> The argument of 'cleaning' was a problem for a little while, but im |
| 27 |
> glad the kernel uses slotting, for the reason I dont want to have a |
| 28 |
> seperate ebuild for different kernels, i dont want old kernel sources |
| 29 |
> to be taken away when the new one turns up, and when i want to get rid |
| 30 |
> of old kernels, i want to be able to do a nice and simple emerge -C |
| 31 |
> <=some-version to get rid of them when im done with them. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Okay, that's good point where slots are really useful. |
| 34 |
But I'm sure there could be other good solutions. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
> The same occurs in many of the web-applications, where multiple versions |
| 37 |
> are handy, but multiple ebuild names would cause headaches. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
hmm, they're an special things, since we can have many instances |
| 40 |
of the same application here. but I never had the need to have |
| 41 |
multiple versions of one webapp (source) installed. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
> the only way to get around all these nasties would be to have a 3 part |
| 44 |
> package name imo, such as |
| 45 |
> dev-libs/gtk/2/2.0.1.ebuild |
| 46 |
> dev-libs/gtk/1/1.0.1.ebuild |
| 47 |
> for instance , and when you look at it like that, it is in essence |
| 48 |
> identical to 'slots', except a 'slot' is governed by a string in the |
| 49 |
> actual file, instead of a string in the filename. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Well, if the slot number would be an part of the package atom name, |
| 52 |
it would be half as bad. |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
cu |
| 56 |
-- |
| 57 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 58 |
Enrico Weigelt == metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ |
| 59 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 60 |
Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: |
| 61 |
http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce |
| 62 |
Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: |
| 63 |
http://patches.metux.de/ |
| 64 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 65 |
-- |
| 66 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives