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:

PREV_PKGNAME
previous package name(s)

PREV_PKGPATH 
previous PKGPATH(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