On 12 March 2012 02:27, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 10:25:38 -0700 (PDT) > Leho Kraav <l...@kraav.com> wrote: > >> On Monday, May 30, 2011 9:30:02 AM UTC+3, Michał Górny wrote: >> > >> > Right now, a quick 'grep -l github.*tarball' shows that there are >> > about 147 ebuilds in portage using github snapshots. This evaluates >> > to 83 different packages. >> > >> > The problem with github is that it suffixes the tarballs with >> > a complete git commit id. This means that the `S' variable >> > in the ebuild needs to refer to a long hash changing randomly. Right >> > now, the problem is handled in a number of ways: >> > >> > 1) (from app-admin/rudy) >> > 2) (app-emacs/calfw and suggested solution for Sunrise) >> > 3) (app-misc/bgrep) >> > 4) (app-misc/tmux-mem-cpu-load) >> > >> > What I'd like to do is creating a small github.eclass, encapsulating >> > a common, nice way of handling the S issue. I guess the best >> > solution would be to git with something like 2) above, with the >> > eclass providing github_src_unpack() for EAPIs 2+. >> >> What is the current situation with this one? Every once in a while I >> run into a github ebuild I need to create and I am not really sure >> what to do with it. >> >> Right now 2) seems like the safest approach. But did anything get >> into EAPI? > > You mean eclass? I submitted one for review but didn't get much of > positive feedback on it. I'll commit it anyway soon, just let me double > check and do some testing.
+1 from me. I think it would be useful to have a standard way of handling this. Cheers, Ben | yngwin
