Vaeth wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Having to write an ebuild just to install something in a package manager
friendly way and be able to uninstall it cleanly later is a defect
No, this is exactly what ebuilds meant for: That the package manager
keeps track of your package, and possibly also recompiles it in case
of library upgrades. For this reason, ebuilds should essentially just
consist of the commands which you would also type in the shell - this
information *must* be provided (together with obviously some data like
package name, slot-requests, and an otional description), but essentially
that should be it.
If it is more work or requires more knowledge to write an ebuild, then
it is the ebuild concept which is defect.
So in your opinion, a future eapi should make ebuilds look closer to this?
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mplayer/mplayer/PKGBUILD
Importare is a very useful and nice tool.
I don't understand, that Portage doesn't have something like that, yet.
(So they should consider doing something like that.)
When I was still using Gentoo, I did a lot of ebuilds for programs which
I found out, that they don't work afterwards.
Using package.provide isn't really nice either, because it then isn't
tracked.
With importare, I can first test it, and if it works, make an
ebuild/exheres and install that.
If you do that, it will automatically upgrade the importare'd package
and uninstall any leftovers, just like a normal update.
BTW, it is not a PM replacement, it is an addition.
You would be considered to be mad if you use importare for everything.
Regards,
Bernd
