I might have missed something in the previous messages, but is there any rationale on this, beside debatable worthiness?
On 15-09-23 00:04:23, Allan McRae wrote: > Signed-off-by: Allan McRae <[email protected]> > --- > scripts/makepkg.sh.in | 8 -------- > 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/makepkg.sh.in b/scripts/makepkg.sh.in > index 793d42c..6ededa3 100644 > --- a/scripts/makepkg.sh.in > +++ b/scripts/makepkg.sh.in > @@ -76,7 +76,6 @@ NOBUILD=0 > NODEPS=0 > NOEXTRACT=0 > PKGFUNC=0 > -PKGLIST=() > PKGVERFUNC=0 > PREPAREFUNC=0 > REPKG=0 > @@ -1718,7 +1717,6 @@ usage() { > printf -- "$(gettext " --noprepare Do not run the %s function in > the %s")\n" "prepare()" "$BUILDSCRIPT" > printf -- "$(gettext " --nosign Do not create a signature for > the package")\n" > printf -- "$(gettext " --packagelist Only list packages that would > be produced, without PKGEXT")\n" > - printf -- "$(gettext " --pkg <list> Only build listed packages > from a split package")\n" > printf -- "$(gettext " --printsrcinfo Print the generated SRCINFO > and exit")\n" > printf -- "$(gettext " --sign Sign the resulting package > with %s")\n" "gpg" > printf -- "$(gettext " --skipchecksums Do not verify checksums of the > source files")\n" > @@ -1808,7 +1806,6 @@ while true; do > --nosign) SIGNPKG='n' ;; > -o|--nobuild) NOBUILD=1 ;; > -p) shift; BUILDFILE=$1 ;; > - --pkg) shift; IFS=, read -ra p <<<"$1"; > PKGLIST+=("${p[@]}"); unset p ;; > --packagelist) PACKAGELIST=1 IGNOREARCH=1;; > --printsrcinfo) PRINTSRCINFO=1 ;; > -r|--rmdeps) RMDEPS=1 ;; > @@ -2060,11 +2057,6 @@ elif [[ $SPLITPKG -eq 0 ]] && have_function > package_${pkgname}; then > SPLITPKG=1 > fi > > -if [[ -n "${PKGLIST[@]}" ]]; then > - unset pkgname > - pkgname=("${PKGLIST[@]}") > -fi > - > # check if gpg signature is to be created and if signing key is valid > if { [[ -z $SIGNPKG ]] && check_buildenv "sign" "y"; } || [[ $SIGNPKG == 'y' > ]]; then > SIGNPKG='y' > -- > 2.5.3 -- Pierre Neidhardt Q: Why was Stonehenge abandoned? A: It wasn't IBM compatible.
