Subject: Re: Alternatives in the same package
To: Mike M. Volokhov <email@example.com>
From: Quentin Garnier <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/20/2005 14:00:20
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 02:51:07PM +0300, Mike M. Volokhov wrote:
> 1) Split package on three chunks - xmlformat-ruby, xmlformat-perl,
> xmlformat-docs. Latest package will contain only support documentation,
> independly what kind of script you use. The xmlformat-ruby and
> xmlformat-perl will be bounded together via PKGALTERNATIVES framework.
That's what you should do, I think, except for the part that involves
alternatives: a user will want either versions, not both, unless it is
a package likely to be used by some other packages that might invoke it
in Ruby or PERL. In the latter case, both versions should be installed,
or each package installing an appropriately named version of the script.
Again, no alternatives framework involved.
> 2) Use variable named, say, USE_LANG which may be set to "ruby" or
> "perl" at the build stage. Resulted package name may be also dependent
> on the selected value for USE_LANG. The conflicts will be also handled.
In that case, the correct way of doing this would be with the
Quentin Garnier - email@example.com - cube@NetBSD.org
"When I find the controls, I'll go where I like, I'll know where I want
to be, but maybe for now I'll stay right here on a silent sea."
KT Tunstall, Silent Sea, Eye to the Telescope, 2004.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----