At Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:35:06 +0200,
Quentin Garnier wrote:
> 
> While I care very little about the issue, I still think that having
> DISTNAME explicitely defined was, and is still, something positive in
> my eyes.

Indeed.

> The thing you start the package with is the dist file.  That's
> something you have no control over, and the only thing you know when
> you start working with it.
> 
> Of course, there are packages without dist files, and so on;  cases for
> which setting DISTNAME makes no sense at all.  Also, we don't put the
> extension in DISTNAME, which is kind of a hack.
> 
> But I do like the idea of "this is what I start with".  PKGNAME is not
> something you (as a package author) decide beforewards:  you actually
> derive it from the name the original author gave to his work.

However PKGNAME is what pkgsrc calls the package -- the author's name
for his or her package need not be related to what pkgsrc calls the
package, and indeed this disconnect may be necessary to deal with
conflicts.

It would be very nice though to include DISTNAME in the +BUILD_INFO....

-- 
						Greg A. Woods

H:+1 416 218-0098  W:+1 416 489-5852 x122  VE3TCP  RoboHack <woods@robohack.ca>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>          Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>