Marius Mauch wrote: > Two questions: > - are there more packages that could benefit from this? >
None that I know of. However, there might be other similar packages without a source tarball (slim chance, but quite possible). At first, I asked upstream to provide such tarball, but I got refused because "SourceForge file release process is far too annoying". As a side note, if bitpim wasn't such a fairly popular package, I wouldn't even bother with it (personally I don't use it). > - is there a particular reason this has to be integrated into the > ebuild and should not be handled by an ordinary script? > There are 2 reasons: a) convenience - no need to pass version to the script b) maintainability - easy to take over when I will be gone P.S: The name proposed by me isn't exactly right, as Mike already remarked on the bug. I suggest to use src_create as function name.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
