Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <3C41D266.5080601@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:31:02 -0500
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: ITP: libtool-devel, libtool-stable, libtool (wrappers)
References: <3C3C8A0E DOT 9000100 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20020109183309 DOT GB6261 AT redhat DOT com> <024601c1995d$304b3d10$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <3C41314E DOT 50406 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <05ec01c19c02$d05b0c20$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <3C4137B5 DOT 2000807 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <060a01c19c06$67e56bf0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20020113163642 DOT GB1957 AT redhat DOT com> <3C41C070 DOT 7080102 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20020113180315 DOT GA2647 AT redhat DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 12:14:24PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> 
>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>
>>>Didn't I already vote on this?  I can't remember.
>>>
>>>I say "just do it", too.
>>>
>>I'm waiting for resolution/consensus on the '-' vs. '_' issue...if we 
>>*are* going to rename auto*-[stable|devel] to auto*_[stable|devel], I 
>>don't want to have to rename the libtool packages too.  I want them 
>>named "correctly" from the beginning.
>>
> 
> I thought that the consensus (i.e., Robert and me) was that '_' shouldn't
> be special.


Correct, but I'm referring to a different '-' vs. '_' issue -- the one 
you outline below:

> 
> I don't see any reason to rename libtool-devel to libtool_devel, though.
> It is only a problem when there is a number involved after the dash.
> There are other packages which use dashes in their names.


right -- and robert is (tentatively?) advocating a CHANGE in that -- 
disallowing '-' within the pkgname field.  It looks like you, me, and 
Corinna all prefer the status quo: dashes okay, and require parsing from 
R to L, so that the final two '-' delimited fields (of N >= 3) are VER 
and REL.

So, xxx-yyy-zzz-VER-REL has five "fields" (even though we presume that 
xxx-yyy-zzz is the actual pkgname, '-' characters and all).  When parsed 
R to L, you end up with field #5 =REL, field #4 =VER, and "the rest" = name.

Robert is worried about the fragility of that scheme, and (may) be 
advocating a requirement so that:

xxx_yyy_zzz-VER-REL

has specifically 3 '-' delimited fields. No confusion. Field #1 =name. 
Field #2=VER.  Field #3=REL.  This requires renaming five existing 
packages, and impacts the naming of my proposed libtool packages.

--Chuck