On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 03:37:57PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > * The name also suggests to me that it will control sys-* > > implementations, but the victims so far are all app-*. Obviously, > > we don't want twenty *-meta categories though. > > > > * The -meta prefix is already used in a bunch of ebuilds to mean > > something different. The packages in sys-meta won't be > > "metapackages" in the same sense. > > I don't really care how it's named. I've chosen "sys-" because in my > PoC it happens to control tools that are part of the base system. > I suppose we could also want it for less important stuff like notify- > send (though I guess I'll lastrite that eselect anyway). I think we > should just use one category for all of them, and I'm open to a better > name.
Not seeing an issue with a new category myself, I'd rather these be split to avoid confusion and it be clear for users what it is. Not sure for a better name though, alternatives/tar? Haven't really thought about it, but technically no need for a prefix- like virtual. -- ionen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
