Marius Mauch wrote:
> If it's only used to indicate that the package doesn't install any
> files I'd suggest to use 'empty' or 'nocontents' instead. 'virtual'
> somehow implies that it's only applicable to packages in the 'virtual'
> category, which isn't the case with the given definition (as you said).
I like "virtual", since it really gets at the spirit of what the ebuild does.
"empty" sounds like it does nothing at all, and "nocontents" sounds that way to,
to me.
An analogy to "virtual" is a virtual method in OO programming - it sits at a
high level, does nothing in itself, but causes underlying methods to perform the
work.
-Joe
