On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:39:38 +0900 matimatik <[email protected]> wrote: > In fact, the point is why we should use '/' instead of '-' for > subproviders, subcategories or whatever? Taking into account number of > categories (any style), i should consider that there ain't any reasons > to make another fs hierarchy level.
The reason is to avoid huge directories.
> Moreover, assuming we have
> suggested provider-based categories, this may end with non-consistent
> hierarchy: three levels down to exheres for big providers, two level
> for small – not very usable for shell scripting and same stuff.
>
> Just as example:
>
> find /var/db/paludis/repositories/arbor/packages/ -maxdepth 2
> -mindepth 2 | sed -e 's,/, ,g' | awk '{print $8}'
>
> will print all package names for arbour,
No, it really won't. Use 'cave print-ids' or 'cave print-packages'.
Don't try to parse the tree layout manually.
> find /var/db/paludis/repositories/*/packages/ -maxdepth 2 -mindepth
> 2 | sed -e 's,/, ,g' | awk '{print $8}'
>
> will do the same for all installed repositories (i know that it can be
> optimized, yes ;)). How long would be such one-liner for mixed-depth
> hierarchy?
'cave print-packages'...
> Yes, when (and if) we'll have good exheres tagging system (which
> depends more on package maintainers efforts then on paludis code), we
> will be free to break categorization to the hell (although i like
> shell scripting and cannot see why we need this breakage).
Mostly tagging depends upon someone deciding what tagging is... Tags
are one of those things where no-one agrees on the definition, let
alone the implementation.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Exherbo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev
