On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 02:46:49PM +0200, Ali H. Caliskan wrote: > Well I was referring to two packages with one PGKBUILD. Jan de Groot has > come closer to that idea, see [1]. Although I think it shoule be a single > pkgname field with pkg1, pkg1 names, and single pkgver, with pkgver1, > pkgver2 etc. while the build section should have pkg1 pkg2, pkg3 etc. I don't really understand what you are referring to, are you proposing a different format for PKGBUILDS for splitpkgs? If so, an example and a list of advantages compared to the momentary format would go a long way. > Observe that pkg1 is the head section, while pkg2, pkg3 is subsection of the > build. Not really, first the pkgname array and common variables are defined, then follows the build function and a package_$pkgname function for each package. >I've implemented this concept with python, and it works. Please elaborate. What exactly have you implemented? And what does this implementation do, that makepkg 3.3 does not? > > 1: > http://repos.archlinux.org/viewvc.cgi/mesa/repos/extra-x86_64/PKGBUILD?revision=51142&view=markup > PS: Please do not top-post.
