Elias,
Regarding the recent commits to change the normal_install_name variant
name to without_prefix, I'm disappointed that this change was made
without any discussion, given the previous discussion several months
agoand work I put in coming up with that name, and committing it to a
number of ports to be consistent.
The new name, without_prefix, isn't entirely accurate, since it implies
there are no executables with a prefix, but the prefixed name will
exists. That why the normal_install_name variant name is named that
way, since it doesn't imply the removal of the prefixed name.
Would you mind reverting your variant name change and we can discuss a
better name.
BTW, I'm not disputing the name is ugly, but it was a best attempt at
being accurate.
Thanks,
Blair
Elias Pipping wrote:
correction:
that would mean:
* rename file to gfile
* rename gnutar to gtar
* ...
* make gnutar (then gtar) install "gtar" (nothing to be done)
* make gsed install "gsed"
* ...
Regards,
Elias Pipping
On Feb 27, 2007, at 12:11 PM, Elias Pipping wrote:
I'm starting to take that g-suffix back into consideration. Could you
live
with gwhich,gsed,gawk,gcc *and gtar*?
that would mean:
* rename gnused to gsed
* rename file to gfile
* rename gnutar to gtar
* ...
* make gnutar (then gtar) install "gtar"
* ...
Regards,
Elias Pipping
On Feb 27, 2007, at 10:56 AM, Emmanuel Hainry wrote:
Citando Elias Pipping :
My point was not only to draw attention to the matter but
also to encourage you to propose a convention. Since that
approach has failed I'll come up with a proposal:
I see it this way:
* Yes, there should be a prefix for gnu ports
* Yes, that prefix should be the same for the installed
binary and the portname
* No, it should not be "g" (easier to distinguish from
gnome ports)
* 'gnu' would be a possibility. The only conflict would
be with gnuplot, which is not gnu software. but I guess
that's possible to live with.
Any opinion on this matter, anyone?
Not sure a convention is the best for all ports. For sed and which, I
have no preference. For gnutar, I prefer the name gnutar. For gnuawk, I
prefer to name it gawk (which is the name it has on debian (for which
the default awk is nawk (or is it mawk?))). For the GNU Compiler
collection, I prefer (and I think everybody does) gcc, gcj, gfortran
instead of gnucc, gnucj, even though the name of macports' gcc is
gcc-dp-42 (why dp?;)...
Oh, and why must gnu programs be distinguished from gnome?
On Feb 26, 2007, at 5:38 PM, Elias Pipping wrote:
There are some inconsistencies when it comes to gnu ports
e.g.:
"tar" goes by the name "gnutar". its executable is called "gnutar"
"sed" goes by the name "gsed". its executable is called "gnused"
"which" goes by the name "gwhich". its executable is called "gwhich"
Emmanuel
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
--
Blair Zajac, Ph.D.
CTO, OrcaWare Technologies
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subversion training, consulting and support
http://www.orcaware.com/svn/
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
