Re: pkg_summary to include PKGBASENAME and PKGVERSION?

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 03:11:23PM -0400, matthew sporleder wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
> <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:51:04PM -0400, matthew sporleder wrote:
> >> After a few threads about new pkgsrc tools have come out, it seems
> >> that a common need is a way to define a package's name without a
> >> version and that version string by itself.
> >
> > Why add 100% redundant information?
> >
> 
> The only justification is to save tool developers from having to
> derive it.

The overhead is about 5 lines of code in C including error checking. 

> I guess it could be similar to CATEGORIES vs PKGPATH.
> (although I see some pkgs have multiple categories but only show up in
> one path)

CATEGORIES can not be derived from PKGPATH and vice versa. E.g. pkgsrc
in wip don't contain wip as category and more than one category can be
present.

Joerg