Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
- To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
- From: Junichi Uekawa <dancer@netfort.gr.jp>
- Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 01:00:33 +0900
- Message-id: <[🔎] 871y4wqwv2.wl@vivare.dancer.pr.jp>
- In-reply-to: <20021120162937.GG23083@dragon.kitenet.net>
- References: <20021120095032.GA3581@espresso> <20021120221432.27570cd6.bug1@optushome.com.au> <20021120113839.GA23393@evbergen.xs4all.nl> <20021120231040.7d475b80.bug1@optushome.com.au> <20021120123302.GD23661@darkness.linuxasylum.net> <20021121002415.18c551f8.bug1@optushome.com.au> <20021120162937.GG23083@dragon.kitenet.net>
> > "Instead of the developers learning to treat certain versions as separate
> > packages, the developers taught Portage how to handle and maintain several
> > versions of the same package though the use of SLOTs."
> >
> > It goes on to explain further with an example, basically they have an
> > extra field to differentiate between packages with the same name.
>
> rpm does this (using the version as the extra field) and it is a real PITA.
If it can be used to shut people up about "name mangling",
it sounds like a good idea, after all.
Or a "Realname" field, which contains a package name that is unmangled.
(which is basically a Provides: field with versions).
regards,
junichi
Reply to: