Re: [Pkgutil-users] package map file

[<ma...@pr...>]

On Wed 28/07/10 12:18 PM , Dagobert Michelsen da...@op... sent:
> Am 28.07.2010 um 12:58 schrieb ma...@pr...:
>> a) catalogue format changed so that dependencies
>> are listed by catalogue name, not package name
>
> This is virtually undoable as the format is fixed.

Fixed by whom?  pkgutil could easily support both formats.

> For what you envision there are hooks which can provide the update functionality even on  
> package name change.

I don't understand.  What hooks do you mean?  How would I use them to fix the dependency issue?  Please explain further.

>> c) some automatic logic for handling version numbers without a REV
>> component on non-CSW packages (as per my earlier pkgutil patch)
>> unless an entry in the pkgutil.map file explicitly provides the
>> version string to use in the catalogue
> 
> I would prefer to enforce having REV in the pkgmap if the package doesn't have it.
> It would obsolete special compare-functions this way.

Defeats the object of supporting third party packages without tampering with them.  We can't force third parties to stick to a particular pkginfo format.  Bear in mind that the REV component of the VERSION string was never a standard anyway (check the pkginfo(4) man page), it was only something that Sun was doing with their packages and I guess Peter thought he may as well do the same thing with pkgutil.  Really PSTAMP is supposed to do this job, according to the official documentation.  For non-CSW packages, we really will need to cope with different variations of VERSION strings.

Best regards,
Mark.