Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:25:56 -0400
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 April 2012 00:15:45 Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:10:30 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > > > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for
> > > > allowing users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when
> > > > to run eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it
> > > > unconditionally but sometimes users have patches which touch
> > > > autoconf files but my existing patch set doesn't so I'm not
> > > > calling eautoreconf. Does anyone have a suggested way to handle
> > > > this?
> > >
> > > just always call it when the user applies patches. i don't see a
> > > big deal. epatch_user && eautoreconf
> >
> > No configure.{ac,in} present!
>
> if the package doesn't have configure.{ac,in} files, then why would
> he be talking about eautoreconf ?
Ah, so we're talking per-package now. Sorry, thought it would be forced
everywhere.
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote: >> So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing >> users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run >> eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but >> sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my >> existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone >> have a suggested way to handle this? > > just always call it when the user applies patches. i don't see a big deal. > epatch_user && eautoreconf > -mike That works. I was wondering if you guys did anything more crafty but this is fine. Thanks all for the input. -- Doug Goldstein
Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On Tuesday 24 April 2012 00:18:59 Michał Górny wrote: > It's simply better just to assume: if user wants user patches, he/she > needs to have necessary deps installed. if the package doesn't ever run autotools itself, i think this assumption is fine. set AUTOTOOLS_AUTO_DEPEND=no before inherting things and always run autotools if the user applies patches. otherwise we penalize a lot of people who don't apply custom patches. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On Tuesday 24 April 2012 00:15:45 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:10:30 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
> > > users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
> > > eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
> > > sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
> > > existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does
> > > anyone have a suggested way to handle this?
> >
> > just always call it when the user applies patches. i don't see a big
> > deal. epatch_user && eautoreconf
>
> No configure.{ac,in} present!
if the package doesn't have configure.{ac,in} files, then why would he be
talking about eautoreconf ?
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:14:15 -0400 Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 06:05 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:45:36 -0500 > > Doug Goldstein wrote: > > > > > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for > > > allowing users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to > > > run eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it > > > unconditionally but sometimes users have patches which touch > > > autoconf files but my existing patch set doesn't so I'm not > > > calling eautoreconf. Does anyone have a suggested way to handle > > > this? > > > > inherit autotools-utils > > That doesn't help the numerous packages that don't ship some of the > autoconf macros they use in their source tarball, and therefore > require additional build-time dependencies (gnome-common, gtk-doc-am, > and so forth) to provide the macros needed for eautoreconf. We can't help them unless you want the whole tree (including those packages) to forcedly depend on them. It's simply better just to assume: if user wants user patches, he/she needs to have necessary deps installed. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:10:30 -0400
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
> > users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
> > eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
> > sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
> > existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does
> > anyone have a suggested way to handle this?
>
> just always call it when the user applies patches. i don't see a big
> deal. epatch_user && eautoreconf
> -mike
No configure.{ac,in} present!
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 06:05 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:45:36 -0500 > Doug Goldstein wrote: > > > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing > > users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run > > eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but > > sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my > > existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone > > have a suggested way to handle this? > > inherit autotools-utils That doesn't help the numerous packages that don't ship some of the autoconf macros they use in their source tarball, and therefore require additional build-time dependencies (gnome-common, gtk-doc-am, and so forth) to provide the macros needed for eautoreconf. -Alexandre.
Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote: > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing > users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run > eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but > sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my > existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone > have a suggested way to handle this? just always call it when the user applies patches. i don't see a big deal. epatch_user && eautoreconf -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:45:36 -0500 Doug Goldstein wrote: > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing > users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run > eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but > sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my > existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone > have a suggested way to handle this? inherit autotools-utils -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
On 24 April 2012 09:15, Doug Goldstein wrote: > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing > users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run > eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but > sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my > existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone > have a suggested way to handle this? grub2 checks for a DO_AUTORECONF env. var. to decide whether to run eautoreconf. This does cause some QA warnings, though. -- Arun Raghavan http://arunraghavan.net/ (Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
[gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage
So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone have a suggested way to handle this? Thanks. -- Doug Goldstein
