I have been thinking about this some more and my head is beginning to hurt... > + backup_o=$backup > + conflicts_o=$conflicts > + depends_o=$depends > + groups_o=$groups > + install_o=$install > + license_o=$license > + pkgdesc_o=$pkgdesc > + pkgname_o=$pkgname > + pkgver_o=$pkgver > + provides_o=$provides > + replaces_o=$replaces > + url_o=$url >
Why would we need to change license, pkgver and url? This is for splitting packages that come in a single source file... Otherwise you make two PKGBUILDs. Can anyone give me a possible reason for changing these. I'm not sure about groups but there might be some reason to change that. I can think of reasons to change the options array so that should be included. Should we allow varying pkgrels between the split packages? I really think we need to take a big step back here. What we really need is to have a prototype PKGBUILD for a split package that is relatively agreed upon. As I said in other emails there are multiple ways to do this and one needs to be chosen. Once the decisions have been made about the approach to take, and a naming scheme for functions/variables, then we can look at patches. At the moment the patches seem without a defined goal (at least to me). Allan _______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
