Subject: Re: meta-packages with empty PLIST have "meta-pkgs" as a CATEGORIES?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/10/2003 09:26:59
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Lubomir Sedlacik wrote:
> > Is it okay if meta-packages that don't have any distfile and have any
> > empty PLIST have an additional CATEGORIES "meta-pkgs"?
> > Is this okay for graphics/gimp?
> > -CATEGORIES= graphics
> > +CATEGORIES= graphics meta-pkgs
> > And should any others like it (true metapackage, no distfile, no
> > PLIST), also add "meta-pkgs"?
> what's your intention with it? you didn't say anything about the
> reasons behind it.
So someone can browse the meta-pkgs category on a website or FTP server
and quickly see all the meta-packages.
And so someone can quickly grep or look at the Makefiles and know that the
package is a meta-package. (And maybe they will decide they don't need
entire meta-package, but just one of its components.)
Jeremy C. Reed