gnu-system-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Package format/management ramblingss


From: Soeren D. Schulze
Subject: Re: Package format/management ramblingss
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 15:22:28 +0200

Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>    The problem is that one would have to configure all the programs to
>    expect a version number after their configuration and data
>    files/directories, even in user directory. 
> 
> If that is the case we can always fix the program to work correctly.
> By accessing the file "address@hidden" or somesuch instead.

Hm, this is something different because it is not controlled by the
translator.  I wonder if dashes would be acceptable in this case.

>    /share/pixmaps/foo.xpm-21 -> /packages/emacs-21/share/pixmaps/foo.xpm
>    (Maybe foo-21.xpm would be better.)
> 
> It wouldn't, consider the case where you have a real file called
> "foo-21.xpm", then a file called "foo.xpm".  Which file would be
> accessed if one accesses /share/pixmaps/foo-21.xpm?  The same applies
> for foo.xpm-21 and any other combination.  Dashes are a weak way to
> delimit versions; the suggestion that will probobly be used it the one
> I wrote about above.

The problem is that programs determine the type of a file regarding its
suffix.  When this is ".xpm-21" or "address@hidden", they may get confused.

>    Which package is allowed to put files where?
> 
> A package is _only_ allowed to put files in /packages/PACKAGE.  It is
> a package after all.

Of course.
I was speaking of the directories that the translator controls.  (OK,
it is an implementation detail if we perhaps control even /packages by
one, but I do not mean this.)

>    Should we allow other packages to put files in /share/emacs?
> 
> No package will put files in /share/emacs, that directory is a virtual
> one.  /share/emacs would be the union of /packages/*/share/emacs.

This means "yes"; any program can a have a share/emacs subdirectory.

Perhaps we should make every program always to expect the version
number in the file (not directory) name.
But consequently, a directory would look like this:

$ ls /share/automake # example not 100% true
COPYING
address@hidden
address@hidden
INSTALL
address@hidden
address@hidden
acinstall
address@hidden
address@hidden
ansi2knr.1
address@hidden
address@hidden
ansi2knr.c
address@hidden
address@hidden
clean-hdr.am
address@hidden
address@hidden
clean-kr.am
address@hidden
address@hidden
...


Soeren Schulze



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]