Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Sergej Pupykin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> I see a downside in the proposed scheme: you can not create a package
>>> without the $pkgname- suffix, e.g. you can't create the "kopete" or
>>> "kmail" package from "kdenetwork". Moreover, you can't change the
>>> pkgdesc for each sub-package, which can be useful.
>>>
>> makepkg may use subpackages as a new package name
>>
>> subpackages=(foo-dev foo-doc kmail kopete)
>>
>
> Exactly what I was going to say - it's all hypothetical. We could use
> $pkgdir/full-package-name/* for a subpackage "full-package-name"
>
Just another thought. Why do we even need the subpkg array. Why not:
"pkgname=foo" for single packages and "pkgname=('foo' 'foo-bar'
'foo-doc')" for split packages? I would have to check that you can do
that in bash...
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
