Re: wip/hylafax-devel 4.3.0 rc1 - please test package

Andreas Hallmann <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.netbsd.devel.pkgsrc.wip.review
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 08:39:34AM -0700, Min Sik Kim wrote:
> On Apr 20, 2006, at 8:35 AM, Andreas Hallmann wrote:
> 
> I'm not objecting to keeping the development version of hylafax.   
> What I don't like is its PKGNAME.  See mail/mutt and mail/mutt-devel  
> for example.  Although they have different directory names, their  
> package name is "mutt".  Unless you make hylafax-devel installable  
> with hylafax (non-development version) without conflicts, you should  
> either add CONFLICTS to both packages or make them have the same  
> package name (hylafax).  I think the latter would be better.
> 
> Regards,
> Min Sik Kim
> 

I see, CONFLICTS are there for a while. 
I begged and prepared for a hylafax-devel in pkgsrc a few years ago.

So 

508: grep CONFLICTS /usr/pkgsrc/comms/hylafax/Makefile 
CONFLICTS=      hylafax-devel-[0-9]* mgetty-[0-9]*

509: grep CONFLICTS /usr/pkgsrc/wip/hylafax-devel/Makefile 
CONFLICTS=      hylafax-[0-9]* mgetty-[0-9]*

is in the packages.


I will rethink the second option, now that I understand you right.

I personally like the postfix "-devel" for packages from a development branch in general.
Think of it as a "you haved been warned". So a quick "pkg_info | grep -- -devel" 
can tell me if a system is to be considered stable and ready for prime time.
As an administrator you can have a hard time to remember the version logique of each and every 
package you have installed.
So IMHO flagging development versions with a '-devel' suffix is a good thing.

Even so, I understand that introducing this discipline to a large dependancy tree as i.e. gnome 
can be a major headache. But for leave packages like mutt or hylafax this is no concern.

BTW: There are some tools around like pkgdepgraph,pkg_chk etc.
     In the case of a system upgrade: are they able to determine the correct 
     pkg-directory from which the installed package i.e. mutt was build?

OK:  PKGPATH is noted in +BUILD_INFO, so they should be able to do the right thing.

ergo: I think I understand your point now and hope you got mine.

Regards
	Andreas
-- 
NetBSD: If you happen to have any problem with your uptime.



-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.