Mailing List Archive: Gentoo: Dev

Re: Some 'proper coding' notes for ebuilds

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

usata at gentoo

Aug 3, 2003, 7:57 AM

Post #1 of 5 (462 views)
Permalink

Re: Some 'proper coding' notes for ebuilds

Hi,

At Sat, 2 Aug 2003 22:38:57 -0400,
Mike Frysinger wrote:

> oooooooooh and stop trying to run the `patch` cmd yourself ...

Agreed ;-)

> no one is cooler than `epatch` (which is integrated into portage now, so dont
> 'inherit eutils'), so stop trying to think you ppl are

I'm afraid we should add 'inherit eutils' because though epatch is now
integrated into unstable version of portage, stable version of portage
(2.0.48-r5) doesn't have this functionality. I came across the
problem in http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23131#c11 and found
we need 'inherit eutils' for stable.

Anyhow, some of the ebuilds seem to use epatch without 'inherit
eutils' (and I guess they will fail to compile properly). I counted
that sort of ebuild using small sh script and it says 332 ebuilds use
epatch without declairing 'inherit eutlis' ;-( Well, I included both
stable and unstable ebuilds, but at least for stable we need to write
'inherit epatch' at this moment.

cf. here is the list of such ebuilds:

http://dev.gentoo.org/~usata/ebuild_wepatch_woeutils.txt

--
Mamoru KOMACHI <usata [at] gentoo>
http://dev.gentoo.org/~usata/

--
gentoo-dev [at] gentoo mailing list

usata at gentoo

Aug 3, 2003, 8:00 AM

Post #2 of 5 (446 views)
Permalink

Re: Some 'proper coding' notes for ebuilds [In reply to]

usata at gentoo

Aug 3, 2003, 8:10 AM

Post #3 of 5 (447 views)
Permalink

Re: Some 'proper coding' notes for ebuilds [In reply to]

usata at gentoo

Aug 3, 2003, 9:23 AM

Post #4 of 5 (444 views)
Permalink

Re: Some 'proper coding' notes for ebuilds [In reply to]

Hi,

At Sun, 3 Aug 2003 17:40:27 +0200,
Paul de Vrieze wrote:

> I didn't go through the list, but there are also eclasses that inherit eutils,
> and so provide epatch in an ebuild without it inheriting eutils.

Thank you for the comment. {games,kde,php,vim}.eclass use eutils
internally, so I excluded them, recalculated the ebuilds and got

% wc -l ebuild_wepatch_woeutils.txt 264

I updated the list at
http://dev.gentoo.org/~usata/ebuild_wepatch_woeutils.txt

regards,

--
Mamoru KOMACHI <usata [at] gentoo>
http://dev.gentoo.org/~usata/

--
gentoo-dev [at] gentoo mailing list

usata at gentoo

Aug 3, 2003, 10:04 AM

Post #5 of 5 (443 views)
Permalink

Re: Some 'proper coding' notes for ebuilds [In reply to]

Hi,

At Mon, 4 Aug 2003 01:27:41 +0900,
Georgi Georgiev wrote:

> An alternative would be to make the package depend on a later portage.

Yeah, I like the idea. But the problem is portage 2.0.48 branch
(neither stable 2.0.48-r5 nor unstable 2.0.48-r7) doesn't have epatch
integrated into ebuild.sh, so it needs to be backported. Maybe I
should file a bug report to dev-portage [at] g ;-)

regards,

--
Mamoru KOMACHI <usata [at] gentoo>
http://dev.gentoo.org/~usata/

--
gentoo-dev [at] gentoo mailing list

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads