Re: Parsing package filenames (was: Re: New ftp method for dselect)
email@example.com (Bruce Perens) said:
> From: Bill Mitchell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Personally, I also think we'll be better off if we bite the bullet and
> > try to maintain as much backwards compatability as we can with current
> > package naming usage than if we fall into a pattern of blowing off
> > backwards compatability issues in the interest of implementor convenience.
> What programs are we talking about being compatible with? Not dselect or
> dpkg, which don't care about the filename. I'd hazard that dchanges would
> be easy to fix. Dftp would ask for the feature, as would the dselect
> FTP method.
Yes, dchanges should be easy to change if naming conventions change.
> Am I missing something?
I didn't have specific programs in mind, actually. I was thinking
in the general sense. In a slightly specific sense, a change in package
naming conventions which is not backwards compatable with current
naming conventions might have substantial impact on any 2nd-generation
mirrors (and those 1st-generation mirrors which don't make special
arrangements to mitigate the impact) and/or might impact anyone
who has implemented package-naming sensitive local scripts for
whatever local-concern reason, working from our published packaging
guidelines and/or from inspection of our package naming patterns.