gnu ports

[Yves de Champlain]

Le 07-02-27 à 04:56, Emmanuel Hainry a écrit :

> Citando Elias Pipping :
>> My point was not only to draw attention to the matter but
>> also to encourage you to propose a convention. Since that
>> approach has failed I'll come up with a proposal:
>>
>> I see it this way:
>>
>>  * Yes, there should be a prefix for gnu ports
>>  * Yes, that prefix should be the same for the installed
>>    binary and the portname
>>  * No, it should not be "g" (easier to distinguish from
>>    gnome ports)
>>  * 'gnu' would be a possibility. The only conflict would
>>    be with gnuplot, which is not gnu software. but I guess
>>    that's possible to live with.
>>
>> Any opinion on this matter, anyone?
>>
>
> Not sure a convention is the best for all ports. For sed and which, I
> have no preference. For gnutar, I prefer the name gnutar. For  
> gnuawk, I
> prefer to name it gawk (which is the name it has on debian (for which
> the default awk is nawk (or is it mawk?))). For the GNU Compiler
> collection, I prefer (and I think everybody does) gcc, gcj, gfortran
> instead of gnucc, gnucj, even though the name of macports' gcc is
> gcc-dp-42 (why dp?;)...
>
> Oh, and why must gnu programs be distinguished from gnome?


There is some history behind us too.  As far as I know, awk is gawk  
and tar is gnutar.  make is both gnumake and gmake ...

There is an OS behind us too.  We might want to name make and tar  
gmake and gtar just to make a difference from those is /usr/bin or we  
might stick to the same names to avoid confusion.

yves

PS: dp stands for DarwinPorts