Re: [Gnu-arch-users] version aliases

[Miles Bader]

On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 06:24:32PM -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> >How come?  Existing arch names already have a distinctive syntax, so an
> >alias could be anything else (with the rule that they not intrude on the
> >real namespace).
> 
> The problem is, what if I make devo="address@hidden/tla--devo--1.3" 
> and then try to get "address@hidden/tlacontrib--devo--1.3"? 
> Some kinds of alias expansion would turn that into 
> address@hidden/address@hidden/tla--devo--1.3--1.3

I presume that if aliases expansion were added to tla, it would be done
`properly', not as a generic (without context) textual substitution; in such
a case the above is not a problem.

> >The existing patch-NN syntax would look like an alias in such a scheme,
> >but that's an unproblematic special case I think, and indeed, that feature
> >might even be able to use the alias mechanism if it were flexible enough
> >(e.g., allowed `computational aliases', if only for internal tla use).
> 
> I'd rather not let aliases conflict with patch-N syntax.  I think we 
> should be able to specify "patch-N of the current tree-version" by using it.

I don't understand what you're saying; do you mean that you want to
_replace_ the current patch-NN syntax with something like `cur--patch-NN'?
Why not keep the patch-NN syntax too (since the probability that a user
would actually need to use this for himself seems vanishingly small)?

-Miles.
-- 
Would you like fries with that?