On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 9:25 AM Maciej Barć wrote:
>
> > Let's go for a compromise, and combine your naming suggestions into
> > "alt-symlinks".
>
> Perfect, the worst of both worlds! :^D
You know a compromise is when everyone leaves unhappy ;)
-A
>
> On 11/24/22 17:29, Michał Górny wrote:
> >
Let's go for a compromise, and combine your naming suggestions into
"alt-symlinks".
Perfect, the worst of both worlds! :^D
On 11/24/22 17:29, Michał Górny wrote:
On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 08:38 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
Hello, everyone.
TL;DR: I'd like to add sys-meta/{cpio,sh,tar} to install
On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 08:38 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello, everyone.
>
> TL;DR: I'd like to add sys-meta/{cpio,sh,tar} to install and control
> (via USE flags) /bin/{cpio,sh,tar} symlinks.
>
> Draft PR: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/28390
>
Let's go for a compromise, and combine
app -> what if it's library alternatives?
Maybe split to "app-" and "lib-" then?
Also, what about "-alt"? So "app-alt" and "lib-alt".
On 11/24/22 03:05, Ionen Wolkens wrote:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 01:32:04AM +, Alexey Sokolov wrote:
However, I tend to agree that the category should be
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 09:05:47PM -0500, Ionen Wolkens wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 01:32:04AM +, Alexey Sokolov wrote:
> > > However, I tend to agree that the category should be named app-meta
> > > rather than sys-meta, because chances are that non-system packages will
> > > also make
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 01:32:04AM +, Alexey Sokolov wrote:
> > However, I tend to agree that the category should be named app-meta
> > rather than sys-meta, because chances are that non-system packages will
> > also make use of it.
> >
> > Ulrich
>
> Since these packages manage symlinks,
23.11.2022 16:45, Ulrich Mueller пишет:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2022, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
The main reason the new category is distasteful to me is because it's
*so close* to being a virtual. For one, having these packages be
virtuals would make them somewhat self-explanatory to end users. If
we're
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 7:49 AM Ionen Wolkens wrote:
> Not sure for a better name though, alternatives/tar? Haven't really
> thought about it, but technically no need for a prefix- like virtual.
What about 'sys-symlinks' or something similar which indicates that
packages in the category just
On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 08:38 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> What are the advantages of proposed solution over eselect?
> ==
I think it's also worth mentioning the advantages over the usual
virtual approach, where we have a virtual pull in
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:49:20AM -0500, Ionen Wolkens wrote:
> Not sure for a better name though, alternatives/tar? Haven't really
> thought about it, but technically no need for a prefix- like virtual.
For something shorter, select/tar maybe. Or select-meta if want
to keep a more common -
> On Wed, 23 Nov 2022, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> The main reason the new category is distasteful to me is because it's
> *so close* to being a virtual. For one, having these packages be
> virtuals would make them somewhat self-explanatory to end users. If
> we're collectively willing to
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 02:58:14PM +0100, Piotr Karbowski wrote:
> I am very much in favour to have a package that controls those symlinks.
> What is not immediately clear to me is what would that mean for eselect
> in long run. Is it so that you'd like to keep eselect around and alive
>
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 03:37:57PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > * The name also suggests to me that it will control sys-*
> > implementations, but the victims so far are all app-*. Obviously,
> > we don't want twenty *-meta categories though.
> >
> > * The -meta prefix is already
On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 15:37 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
>
>
> PMS doesn't say anything about (new-style) virtuals. It's a Gentoo
> policy entirely.
This is listed as a retroactive change,
Note: A ‘new-style virtual’ is a normal package that installs no
files and uses its dependency
On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 08:47 -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 08:38 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Hello, everyone.
> >
> > TL;DR: I'd like to add sys-meta/{cpio,sh,tar} to install and control
> > (via USE flags) /bin/{cpio,sh,tar} symlinks.
> >
> > Draft PR:
On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 14:58 +0100, Piotr Karbowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 23/11/2022 08.38, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Hello, everyone.
> >
> > TL;DR: I'd like to add sys-meta/{cpio,sh,tar} to install and control
> > (via USE flags) /bin/{cpio,sh,tar} symlinks.
>
> I am very much in favour to have a
Hi,
On 23/11/2022 08.38, Michał Górny wrote:
Hello, everyone.
TL;DR: I'd like to add sys-meta/{cpio,sh,tar} to install and control
(via USE flags) /bin/{cpio,sh,tar} symlinks.
I am very much in favour to have a package that controls those symlinks.
What is not immediately clear to me is
On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 08:38 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello, everyone.
>
> TL;DR: I'd like to add sys-meta/{cpio,sh,tar} to install and control
> (via USE flags) /bin/{cpio,sh,tar} symlinks.
>
> Draft PR: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/28390
>
I generally favor using the package
Hello, everyone.
TL;DR: I'd like to add sys-meta/{cpio,sh,tar} to install and control
(via USE flags) /bin/{cpio,sh,tar} symlinks.
Draft PR: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/28390
What are the problems being solved?
===
We currently provide a certain degree
19 matches
Mail list logo
