On 01/09/15 19:51, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > On mar., 2015-09-01 at 15:43 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: >> On 01/09/15 11:26, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: >>> On Fri, 2015-08-14 at 07:36 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: >>>> On 14/08/15 05:44, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 2015-07-05 at 21:36 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: >>> I understand the need of getting the source of the package I >>> installed >>> locally, but what is the pros of having special source packages in >>> order to replace ABS, instead of a regular package putting source >>> files >>> in a directory like /usr/src/pacman/$pkgname/$pkgver? >> >> That requires installing the binary package to get the sources. >> > If we don't depend on the binary package in the source package, I don't > see why.
I got confused by your wording... "instead of a regular package putting source files in" Now I understand that you are suggesting a package that only has files in /usr/src/pacman/$pkgname/$pkgver and not just putting the files there in the binary package. That is essentially no different to what I was proposing. Except that using the current source package layout (i.e. no root directory), we can have the root path completely configurable. The other advantage of keeping sources in a different repository type, is that "pacman -S glibc" and "pacman -B glibc" will get glibc. No need to have different suffixes or adding repo prefixes. A
