On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 3:58 AM, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On sob, 2017-06-03 at 03:22 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote: > > On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 16:51:25 +0200 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > ...so if a Gentoo package is split into 40 packages in Debian, are you > > > going to list all of them? > > > > If it would be useful to do so, maybe. > > > > But its a text file, people are capable of making judgements about > > adding 3.2k of text, I hope. ( worst-case, 40 lines of 80 characters > each ) > > > > If the text at that size has a use, then, why not? > > > > As long as that 40-package example is an exceptional case, where it was > deemed > > useful, not the norm. > > It's not that exceptional in binary distributions where it's normal to > split a single source into a few dozen packages (libraries, headers, > tools, plugins...): > > https://packages.debian.org/source/sid/systemd > > and that's a small one. I guess we could avoid this if you restricted > those remotes to the source package used to build them all. > I would argue that specifying source package remotes is what should be done for every package. UI layers can use the source package remote to look up metadata for the source package and get a list of the binary packages it produces when built; maintaining this list inside of Gentoo seems ill advised. (I could perhaps be swayed by a script where you populate the source package remote and a tool fills in the binary packages as sourced from debian sid or whatever.) Do we really need to store and distribute this data though? -A > > -- > Best regards, > Michał Górny >
