>-----Original-Nachricht----- >Betreff: Re: [aur-general] Split packages >Datum: 2016-08-23T11:26:07+0200 >Von: "Levente Polyak" <anthr...@archlinux.org> >An: "aur-general@archlinux.org" <aur-general@archlinux.org>
>On 08/22/2016 01:58 PM, stefan-husm...@t-online.de wrote: >> In my opinion, already the name "split package" indicates that these >> should not conflict, otherwise it would not just be a split package, but >> rather something like a "versioned package". >that's wrong, split packages are there to build multiple packages from a >single source without the need to duplicate PKGBUILD that use the very >same source. It was not me who wrote that. >> I think Christoph is completely right here. The only issue I have with his >> PKGBUILD is >> that the conflict line should appear in both package functions and indicate >> the >> conflict to the other package. >That's not needed, not everything needs cross-conflicting to all other >packages providing the same. >In your example you simply add to your pasystray-gtk2 package() function >that it conflicts and provides pasystray, thats it. >The pasystray does not need to know anything about the gtk2 variant. That is exactly what I wanted to say. Best Regards, Stefan
