[Buildroot] [pkg-luarocks infra V3 01/10] luainterpreter: create virtual package
thomas.petazzoni at free-electrons.com
Fri Nov 15 12:56:55 UTC 2013
Dear Thomas De Schampheleire,
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 10:49:15 +0100, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
> > I don't think so, because those options are hidden options, they are
> > merely here to create a "disconnection" between providers of a feature
> > (i.e an OpenGL implementation) and consumers of a feature (i.e
> > applications or libraries using the OpenGL API). So I believe we can
> > rename them as much as we want.
> Ah, great!
> But you haven't yet said whether you agree with my reasoning that the
> PACKAGE in these names is not nice... What do you think about that?
I don't really have a strong feeling on this. I believe we started
using BR2_PACKAGE_HAS_<foo>, just because we are inside package/ so it
kind of makes sense to also use the BR2_PACKAGE_<something> namespace.
That being said, it is true that the wording BR2_PACKAGE_HAS_<foo>
seems to indicate that it is a specific package that has something, not
that the system has a whole has some given feature.
As I said, I don't feel really strongly about this. I don't think the
current BR2_PACKAGE_HAS_<something> is too bad either.
> >> > for virtual packages. This way instead of showing "unknown" in the ">>>
> >> > blabla unknown extracting" messages, we would have ">>> blabla virtual
> >> > extracting".
> >> Sounds good to me. This could also be used for the external toolchain then...
> > Of course, all virtual packages would have to be changed.
> Great again, we have a plan!
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
More information about the buildroot