Subject: Re: difficulty from renaming packages, and how to deal
To: None <tech-pkg@NetBSD.org>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/21/2007 12:20:51
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 12:50:35PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> > We would need to change the format; it doesn't have enough information,
> > because it doesn't encode the PGKNAME of the old PKG_PATH. And it
> > doesn't record anything when PKGNAME changes and PKG_PATH doesn't.
> > But, there are only 128 rename entries, so we could add a new type for
> > name-without-path, and change Renamed to take a pkgname as well.
> I'm not so much opposed to changing the file format, that is reasonable
> easy to do and converting the existing entries is not that hard either.
> My point is that I would prefer it to be the canonical source for this
> kind of information and strongly prefer it over adding some magic IDs
What about our pkg_summary(5) files for use on on systems without any
pkgsrc source (so no pkgsrc/doc/CHANGES-*)?
Maybe pkg_summary(5) can be extended to add two optional variables:
previous package name(s)
So if some tool was searching for a PKGNAME but didn't find it, it could
next search for PREV_PKGNAME to find out new PKGNAME.
Jeremy C. Reed