Subject: Re: difficulty from renaming packages, and how to deal
To: Aleksey Cheusov <email@example.com>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/07/2007 15:20:43
On Wed, 7 Nov 2007, Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
> > Is it possible to place this kind of information to the inside of
> > binary package? How about obtaining all this info like this.
> > ~# pkg_info -Q OVERRIDES /path/to/python-9.9.9.tgz
> > lang/python24 lang/python23 lang/python22 lang/python20
> > ~#
> In my view OVERRIDES (renamings or something else, it doesn't matter)
> are very close to CONFLICTS, DEPENDS and some other variables.
> Its primary source (place where it should be specified) should be
> package's Makefile, not CHANGES-YYYYMM.
> And it should be a part of package summary information, i.e. be
> printed with 'pkg_info -X' and therefore be a part of pkg_summary.gz.
> In this case pkgsrc binary distributions will be more consistent.
I suggested similar in September.
pkg_summary(5) can be extended to add two optional variables that are
defined in the respective Makefiles:
PREV_PKGBASE for previous package name(s)
PREV_PKGPATH for previous PKGPATH(s)
If a tool searching for a PKGBASE (or PKGNAME) didn't find it, it could
next search for PREV_PKGBASE to find out new PKGNAME.
Also this would help with conflicts: ignore the CONFLICTS if the
PREV_PKGBASE had the same PKGBASE as the CONFLICTS.
I don't think any one complained about this. I may start adding support
and documentation for these in a few days.
Jeremy C. Reed