X-Original-To: alpine-aports@mail.alpinelinux.org Delivered-To: alpine-aports@mail.alpinelinux.org Received: from mail.alpinelinux.org (dallas-a1.alpinelinux.org [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3AB3DC1384 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:23:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from BAY004-OMC3S27.hotmail.com (bay004-omc3s27.hotmail.com [65.54.190.165]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B396DC001E for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:23:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from BAY403-EAS96 ([65.54.190.188]) by BAY004-OMC3S27.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.23008); Sat, 9 Jan 2016 09:23:33 -0800 X-TMN: [j1Pnn9K1D7R79fXn0MZbOKveGQCV4WqT] X-Originating-Email: [storedbox@outlook.com] Message-ID: X-Mailinglist: alpine-aports Precedence: list List-Id: Alpine Development List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "alpine-aports@lists.alpinelinux.org" CC: "soeren@soeren-tempel.net" From: David Huffman Subject: RE: [alpine-aports] [PATCH] testing/libgflags: new aport Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 12:23:33 -0500 Importance: normal X-Priority: 3 Thread-Topic: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_9CE8071F-558B-48AF-9FCF-69CF9F41BF9F_" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2016 17:23:33.0311 (UTC) FILETIME=[773F4CF0:01D14B02] X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP --_9CE8071F-558B-48AF-9FCF-69CF9F41BF9F_ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Since it only provides a library and not an application, I figured it would= be preferable for organization purposes. Was I wrong? (Sorry about you getting this twice, my email client apparently isn=E2=80= =99t a fan of replying to mailing lists without some coercion.) Warm regards, David Huffman From: S=C3=B6ren Tempel Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2016 10:29 AM To: alpine-aports@lists.alpinelinux.org Cc: storedbox@outlook.com Subject: Re: [alpine-aports] [PATCH] testing/libgflags: new aport On 09.01.16, David Huffman wrote: > +# Contributor: David Huffman > +# Maintainer: David Huffman > +pkgname=3Dlibgflags > +pkgver=3D2.1.2 > +_srcname=3Dgflags-$pkgver Is there any reason why you called the package libgflags instead of simply naming it gflags? Than you wouldn't need the _srcname variable... S=C3=B6ren. --_9CE8071F-558B-48AF-9FCF-69CF9F41BF9F_ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"

Since it only provides a library and= not an application, I figured it would be preferable for organization purp= oses. Was I wrong?

 

=

(Sorry about you getting this twice, my email client a= pparently isn=E2=80=99t a fan of replying to mailing lists without some coe= rcion.)

Warm regards,

David Huffman

 


From: S=C3=B6ren Tempel
Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2016 10:29 AM=
To: alpin= e-aports@lists.alpinelinux.org
Cc: storedbox@outlook.com
Subject: Re: [alpine-apo= rts] [PATCH] testing/libgflags: new aport

&nbs= p;

On 09.01.16, David Huffman wrote:
>= +# Contributor: David Huffman <storedbox@outlook.com>
> +# Mai= ntainer: David Huffman <storedbox@outlook.com>
> +pkgname=3Dlib= gflags
> +pkgver=3D2.1.2
> +_srcname=3Dgflags-$pkgver

Is= there any reason why you called the package libgflags instead of
simply= naming it gflags? Than you wouldn't need the _srcname variable...

S= =C3=B6ren.

 

<= /div>= --_9CE8071F-558B-48AF-9FCF-69CF9F41BF9F_-- --- Unsubscribe: alpine-aports+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org Help: alpine-aports+help@lists.alpinelinux.org ---