[GRASS5] Package name convention - was: Re: [GRASSLIST:311] Re: Source packages

[Markus Neteler]

[moved to developers list]

Dear developers,

below is a proposal for a modified name convention of GRASS source
packages.

Should we follow below suggestion?

Thanks for comments,

 Markus


On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 04:50:05PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Markus Neteler wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 01:03:02PM -0400, R. Sean Fulton wrote:
> >
> >>Is there a convention for naming GRASS source packages? I ask because
> >>I've been playing with building RPMS and DarwinPorts packages which
> >>assume the source package name and the extracted directory name will
> >>be the same. (e.g. they expect grass-5.0.2_src.tar.gz to extract to
> >>'grass-5.0.2_src/' but it extracts to 'grass5.0.2/')
> >>
> >>That's an oversimplification, there are work-arounds but there seems
> >>to be a convention of APPNAME-VERION for the source directory.
> >
> >
> > Mea culpa - the *GRASS* naming "convention" was a sort of evolving
> > over the years.
> >
> >
> >>Has this issue ever come up? Are the maintainers aware of it? Do you
> >>think anyone cares?
> >
> >
> > Not yet :-) But I see no problem to update the scripts to follow
> > a well known naming convention. Let me know what's common and
> > I'll update the cronjobs.
> >
> 
> 
> %{name}-%version}.tar.gz containing %{name}-%{version}/ is customary,
> for about 90% of the packages I have made, then some have
> %{name}-%{version}_src.tar.gz containing %{name}-%version}/ .
> 
> Since source is typically the standard way of distribution, and there is
> no such thing as a generic binary, IMHO, the _src suffix to the version
> is useless.
> 
> The big thing though is that the directory name should be
> %{name}-%{version}, to avoid having all RPM packagers having to add "-n
> %{name}%{version}" or "-n %{name}_%{version}" or similar to %setup.
> 
> Most important thing is to be consistent though ... otherwise we keep
> having to make patches like this for no reason:
> 
> http://cvs.mandrakesoft.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/contrib-SPECS/grass/grass.spec.diff?r1=1.7&r2=1.8
> 
> - -%setup -q
> +%setup -q -n %{name}%{version}
> 
> >
> >>It's certainly nothing critical, I'm just curious.
> >
> > No problem. If things can be made better, we should improve them.
> 
> It's been mentioned before (so 5.0.0 was right), so chances are that the
> actual naming of the directory in a release is not done by a script, but
> should be ...
> 
> Regards,
> Buchan
> 
> - --
> |--------------Another happy Mandrake Club member--------------|
> Buchan Milne                Mechanical Engineer, Network Manager
> Cellphone * Work            +27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202
> Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering         http://www.cae.co.za
> GPG Key                   http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc
> 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQE+4KodrJK6UGDSBKcRAiJmAJ9LkQMnVuYbNS7SIxe39Ns1cCzd6QCgsfri
> qvPlFLeoJ2DP0LKRjuVhDZQ=
> =O46V
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> ******************************************************************
> Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our
> e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to info at cae.co.za for a copy.
> ******************************************************************