Off-Topic > SCM Extension Requests
Request Normalize-Audio
SamK:
--- Quote from: SamK on February 10, 2013, 02:46:12 AM ---Will test and report as requested.
--- End quote ---
There is a naming issue.
--- Code: ---which mc ; which lame ; which sox ; which normalize ; which normalize-audio
/apps/bin/mc
/apps/bin/lame
/apps/bin/sox
/apps/bin/normalize
--- End code ---
The SCM package has been created with the name and executable as, normalize. This differs from the TCZ and Debian versions which both adopt, normalize-audio.
To maintain consistency with the others, and inter-operability of scripts, it will be preferrable for the SCM package and executable to also be normalize-audio.
Jason W:
Slackware, Arch, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Lunar, Crux, Gentoo, and LFS use the name normalize for this package, and we also almost always stay with the name the upstream authors chose. As well as normally leaving the executable name alone, except for when we add a version number to one so it will not conflict with another package, like gqview1 or gqview2. Most of the TC repo is that way. And the SCM repo is independent from the TCZ one anyway, there are differently named packages in it depending on the package's features. This allows room for more than one version of a package, like xine-xvesa-i486 and xine-xvesa-i686.
I guess the larger question is to we want to impose the Debian naming convention on the repos here that are built from source. And do we want the SCM area to have to have the same package names as the TCZ one for those packages in the TCZ area that follow either Debian or another naming convention besides what the upstream author chose. We do have the import tool making use of Debian packages, and I am not against Debian in any way. But I think as for our own source built repo most folks would prefer the freedom to use the upstream package names or other names like we always have done in the past.
I will think more on it, and I would like to hear what others say on this subject.
curaga:
If Debian doesn't respect the upstream name, then any scripts written against Debian's name are broken, really.
My opinion is that it's better to follow upstream.
tinypoodle:
Here's a quick test from an account on a FreeBSD server which upon commands not found in path would suggest packages to install in home:
--- Code: ---$ normalize-audio
sh: normalize-audio: not found
$ normalize
normalize is not installed, but is available in the following package(s):
Package: dna-qc
Description: A quality control algorithm for DNA sequencing projects
Package: normalize
Description: A tool for adjusting the volume of wave/MP3 files to a standard level
Use the following command to install a package in your home directory:
installhome <package>
Died at /usr/local/packages/bin/normalize line 18.
$
--- End code ---
SamK:
--- Quote from: curaga on February 10, 2013, 02:00:34 PM ---If Debian doesn't respect the upstream name, then any scripts written against Debian's name are broken, really.
My opinion is that it's better to follow upstream.
--- End quote ---
The natural extrapolation of this is that as the TCZ doesn't respect the upstream name, then scripts written against the current TinyCore offering are also broken.
It will be incongruous to have TC offer essentially the same application (albeit from a different repo) under different names.
Edit:
I have sent a PM to the TCZ maintainer inviting an opinion.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version