[gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Matti Bickel
Hi folks, The fox eclass accumulated a lot of cruft over the years. Specifically, it includes quite a bit of code to support versions loong gone from our tree. The only officially supported versions now are 1.6 and 1.7. Thus, I've edited it a bit. Main points are EAPI2 phase support and a lot

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dne 16.9.2010 15:31, Matti Bickel napsal(a): Posting this for review as the diff is rather largish and I'm known to have the usual typo in it ;) Your mail lacks the attachment :) Tom -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Jeremy Olexa
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 16:24:18 +0200, Matti Bickel m...@gentoo.org wrote: On 09/16/2010 03:31 PM, Matti Bickel wrote: -- Now complete with attachments :) Hey Matti, few quick things. * Can you add eclass-manpages documentation? * econf doesn't need to || die * What is the mysterious FOXCONF

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:41:30 -0500 Jeremy Olexa darks...@gentoo.org wrote: * econf doesn't need to || die Is that a novelty change? Most of the tree still does econf || die ... jer

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Matti Bickel
On 09/16/2010 04:41 PM, Jeremy Olexa wrote: Hey Matti, few quick things. Thanks, all done. FOXCONF is now documented (though not set by default). Updated diff and eclass attached. # Copyright 1999-2005 Gentoo Foundation # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 #

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Peter Volkov
В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 16:24 +0200, Matti Bickel пишет: +FOXVER=`get_version_component_range 1-2 ${FOX_PV}` It's better to prefer $() style over ``: http://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashFAQ/082 if [ ${PN} != fox ] ; then FOX_COMPONENT=${FOX_COMPONENT:-${PN}} fi -if [ ${FOXVER} != 1.0 ]

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Matti Bickel
On 09/16/2010 08:32 PM, Peter Volkov wrote: В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 16:24 +0200, Matti Bickel пишет: +FOXVER=`get_version_component_range 1-2 ${FOX_PV}` It's better to prefer $() style over ``: http://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashFAQ/082 Hmm, I prefer Backticks personally, as I like to conserve

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Thursday, September 16, 2010 14:51:39 Matti Bickel wrote: +#1.6: 'x11-libs/fox:1.6' +# 1.7: '~x11-libs/fox-${PV}' first line is using a tab while second is spaces. both should be tabs. FOX_PV=${FOX_PV:-${PV}} while you're here, i'd change to: : ${FOX_PV:=${PV}} for d in

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Peter Volkov
В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 15:29 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет: FOX_PV=${FOX_PV:-${PV}} while you're here, i'd change to: : ${FOX_PV:=${PV}} Why? This looks less readable... -- Peter.

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Matti Bickel
On 09/16/2010 09:29 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: +if [[ -f ${D}/usr/bin/fox-config ]] ; then +mv ${D}/usr/bin/fox-config ${D}/usr/bin/fox-${FOXVER}-config fi seems like you would want || die here Why? I can't imagine how that could fail. signature.asc Description:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Handling of test USE flag in ebuilds

2010-09-16 Thread Thomas Sachau
Am 16.09.2010 03:46, schrieb Ryan Hill: On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:02:00 +0200 Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote: From discussion on IRC, it seems, like there are different options, so i would like to clarify this policy: The test USE flag is (i am only talking about portage now, since i

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Handling of test USE flag in ebuilds

2010-09-16 Thread Thomas Sachau
Am 16.09.2010 04:01, schrieb Samuli Suominen: On 09/15/2010 08:02 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: From discussion on IRC, it seems, like there are different options, so i would like to clarify this policy: The test USE flag is (i am only talking about portage now, since i am most familar with

[gentoo-dev] About wormo's situation?

2010-09-16 Thread Pacho Ramos
Hello I have seen some package metadatas still referring to wormo as their maintainer: $ grep -r wormo */*/metada* app-admin/ulogd/metadata.xml: emailwo...@gentoo.org/email app-arch/pdv/metadata.xml: emailwo...@gentoo.org/email www-client/lynx/metadata.xml:

Re: [gentoo-dev] About wormo's situation?

2010-09-16 Thread Jeremy Olexa
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 23:12:10 +0200, Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote: Hello I have seen some package metadatas still referring to wormo as their maintainer: $ grep -r wormo */*/metada* app-admin/ulogd/metadata.xml: emailwo...@gentoo.org/email app-arch/pdv/metadata.xml:

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-zope/zope-dublincore: ChangeLog zope-dublincore-3.8.0.ebuild

2010-09-16 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
Il giorno gio, 16/09/2010 alle 21.47 +, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (arfrever) ha scritto: - -zope-dublincore-3.6.3.ebuild: - Delete. + -zope-dublincore-3.6.3.ebuild, +zope-dublincore-3.8.0.ebuild: + Version bump. If you remove the Delete from the ChangeLog with the following

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Thursday, September 16, 2010 16:24:14 Matti Bickel wrote: On 09/16/2010 09:29 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: + if [[ -f ${D}/usr/bin/fox-config ]] ; then + mv ${D}/usr/bin/fox-config ${D}/usr/bin/fox-${FOXVER}-config fi seems like you would want || die here Why? I

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Thursday, September 16, 2010 15:41:27 Peter Volkov wrote: В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 15:29 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет: FOX_PV=${FOX_PV:-${PV}} while you're here, i'd change to: : ${FOX_PV:=${PV}} Why? This looks less readable... only because your eyes arent tuned to it -mike

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-zope/zope-dublincore: ChangeLog zope-dublincore-3.8.0.ebuild

2010-09-16 Thread Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
2010-09-16 23:50:44 Diego Elio Pettenò napisał(a): Il giorno gio, 16/09/2010 alle 21.47 +, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (arfrever) ha scritto: - -zope-dublincore-3.6.3.ebuild: - Delete. + -zope-dublincore-3.6.3.ebuild, +zope-dublincore-3.8.0.ebuild: + Version bump. If

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Handling of test USE flag in ebuilds

2010-09-16 Thread Ryan Hill
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 22:42:02 +0200 Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote: Controling the test USE flag alone without the test FEATURE is useless, since it wont run the src_test phase. ...then don't do that? :P And being able to disable the test USE flag with FEATURES=test will result in

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Ryan Hill
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 18:34:17 -0400 Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote: On Thursday, September 16, 2010 15:41:27 Peter Volkov wrote: В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 15:29 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет: FOX_PV=${FOX_PV:-${PV}} while you're here, i'd change to: : ${FOX_PV:=${PV}} Why?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Thursday, September 16, 2010 23:51:21 Ryan Hill wrote: On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 18:34:17 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday, September 16, 2010 15:41:27 Peter Volkov wrote: В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 15:29 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет: FOX_PV=${FOX_PV:-${PV}} while you're here, i'd

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Peter Volkov
В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 18:34 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет: On Thursday, September 16, 2010 15:41:27 Peter Volkov wrote: В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 15:29 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет: FOX_PV=${FOX_PV:-${PV}} while you're here, i'd change to: : ${FOX_PV:=${PV}} Why? This looks less

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: fox.eclass update

2010-09-16 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Friday, September 17, 2010 01:06:19 Peter Volkov wrote: В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 18:34 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет: On Thursday, September 16, 2010 15:41:27 Peter Volkov wrote: В Чтв, 16/09/2010 в 15:29 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет: FOX_PV=${FOX_PV:-${PV}} while you're here, i'd