On Sat, Jul 02, 2005 at 01:43:43PM +0200, foser wrote:
On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 18:33 +0300, Dan Armak wrote:
calling a function in a global scope is a bad idea. it leads to lots of
unneccessary (and timely) computations
Necessary in the case of kde split ebuilds. Take a look at
On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 00:00:38 +0300
Dan Armak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 01 July 2005 23:19, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
It also makes any attempts to parse ebuilds without using bash (our
current strategy) a lot harder (actually causing bash
reimplementation)
You mean you're actually
On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 18:33 +0300, Dan Armak wrote:
calling a function in a global scope is a bad idea. it leads to lots of
unneccessary (and timely) computations
Necessary in the case of kde split ebuilds. Take a look at
kde-functions.eclass::deprange().
So you create functions to do
On Saturday 02 July 2005 14:43, foser wrote:
On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 18:33 +0300, Dan Armak wrote:
calling a function in a global scope is a bad idea. it leads to lots of
unneccessary (and timely) computations
Necessary in the case of kde split ebuilds. Take a look at
On Friday 01 July 2005 23:00, Dan Armak wrote:
On Friday 01 July 2005 23:19, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Friday 01 July 2005 17:14, Jonathan Smith wrote:
Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
Btw, what's wrong with the `DEPEND=$(your_function) || die`
i've proposed? Using a return
On Friday 01 July 2005 00:38, Aron Griffis wrote:
Dan Armak wrote: [Thu Jun 30 2005, 05:11:10PM EDT]
Instead of 'exit 1', qt_min_version should use die. I use that in
deprange and it does work inside $DEPEND.
Well, it's more visible, but it doesn't stop the emerge. I just put
On Thursday 30 June 2005 23:11, Dan Armak wrote:
Instead of 'exit 1', qt_min_version should use die. I use that in
deprange and it does work inside $DEPEND.
Wouldn't this be a good time to implement actual dependency ranges in
portage. Btw. I normally use the following hack that portage might
On Friday 01 July 2005 12:15, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Thursday 30 June 2005 23:11, Dan Armak wrote:
Instead of 'exit 1', qt_min_version should use die. I use that in
deprange and it does work inside $DEPEND.
Wouldn't this be a good time to implement actual dependency ranges in
portage.
On Friday 01 July 2005 14:28, Dan Armak wrote:
On Friday 01 July 2005 12:15, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Thursday 30 June 2005 23:11, Dan Armak wrote:
Instead of 'exit 1', qt_min_version should use die. I use that in
deprange and it does work inside $DEPEND.
Wouldn't this be a good time
Francesco R wrote:
[snip]
s/
# example:
###MY_VER_RANGE 4.0 4.0.16
###MY_VER_RANGE 4.1 4.1.4
###MY_VER_RANGE 5.0
# if a patch contains these three lines then:
# all version = 4.0 but 4.0.16,
# all version = 4.1 but 4.0.16,
# all version = 5.0 will be affected by this patch
/
example:
On Friday 01 July 2005 16:56, Aron Griffis wrote:
Dan Armak wrote: [Fri Jul 01 2005, 03:42:22AM EDT]
...OK, so deprange() needs to signal errors out-of-band. Like setting a
KM_ERROR variable which causes the eclass to abort later on.
Heh, doesn't work for the same reason you can't
On Friday 01 July 2005 08:56 am, Aron Griffis wrote:
How about this?
ebuild:
DEPEND=some stuff
qt_min_dep 3.3
How do you handle the ebuilds which use the qt use flag to determine whether
or not that qt is a dependency?
Caleb
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 17:45:57 +0300
Dan Armak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd rather signal failure to code outside the subshell by
touching a file in $T.
The ${T} directory does not exists when portage source an ebuild
to get its metadatas, so I'm not sure that's a good idea.
Btw, what's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
Btw, what's wrong with the `DEPEND=$(your_function) || die`
i've proposed? Using a return code seems to be the simplest way
to signal a failure, no?
calling a function in a global scope is a bad idea. it
On Friday 01 July 2005 18:14, Jonathan Smith wrote:
- gpg control packet
Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
Btw, what's wrong with the `DEPEND=$(your_function) || die`
i've proposed? Using a return code seems to be the simplest way
to signal a failure, no?
calling a function in a
On Friday 01 July 2005 18:03, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 17:45:57 +0300
Dan Armak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd rather signal failure to code outside the subshell by
touching a file in $T.
The ${T} directory does not exists when portage source an ebuild
to get
On Friday 01 July 2005 17:14, Jonathan Smith wrote:
Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
Btw, what's wrong with the `DEPEND=$(your_function) || die`
i've proposed? Using a return code seems to be the simplest way
to signal a failure, no?
calling a function in a global scope is a bad
On Friday 01 July 2005 23:19, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Friday 01 July 2005 17:14, Jonathan Smith wrote:
Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
Btw, what's wrong with the `DEPEND=$(your_function) || die`
i've proposed? Using a return code seems to be the simplest way
to signal a
Dan Armak wrote:[Fri Jul 01 2005, 10:45:57AM EDT]
Would work, but be against the general move to make the general ebuild
section
purely declarative :-(
Ok, but DEPEND=$(some-function) is no more declarative. The
function is evaluated at the time that the ebuild is read, not later
when
Caleb Tennis wrote:[Fri Jul 01 2005, 10:48:38AM EDT]
On Friday 01 July 2005 08:56 am, Aron Griffis wrote:
How about this?
ebuild:
DEPEND=some stuff
qt_min_dep 3.3
How do you handle the ebuilds which use the qt use flag to determine whether
or not that qt is a dependency?
On Thursday 30 June 2005 22:37, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Caleb Tennis wrote:
Understandable, but I don't know any other way to do it. The function
does nothing more than return a list of ebuild versions to make the
depend happy. It doesn't rely on anything
Dan Armak wrote:[Thu Jun 30 2005, 04:06:03PM EDT]
Because the function takes a parameter - the minimal version
required from which to start the list in the ||.
Makes sense.
Any everyone who thinks functions inside $DEPEND are iffy should
look at deprange() and deprange-dual()... /me
On Thursday 30 June 2005 03:36 pm, Aron Griffis wrote:
See the problem? It didn't exit. That's what will happen if
a function in DEPEND fails: nothing. Except that yours will currently
stick this in DEPEND:
!!! error: qt_min_version called with invalid parameter: \$1\,
please
On Thursday 30 June 2005 04:42 pm, Caleb Tennis wrote:
On Thursday 30 June 2005 03:36 pm, Aron Griffis wrote:
See the problem? It didn't exit. That's what will happen if
a function in DEPEND fails: nothing. Except that yours will currently
stick this in DEPEND:
!!! error:
On Thursday 30 June 2005 23:36, Aron Griffis wrote:
Dan Armak wrote: [Thu Jun 30 2005, 04:06:03PM EDT]
Because the function takes a parameter - the minimal version
required from which to start the list in the ||.
Makes sense.
Any everyone who thinks functions inside $DEPEND are
25 matches
Mail list logo
