[gentoo-dev] Apply patch depending on USE flag

[gentoo-dev] Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Ajai Khattri]

I would like to have an ebuild apply a patch based on whether a USE flag
is set or not - what is the standard way to do this in an ebuild? (Or is
there some function already available to do it?).

-- 
Aj.
Sys. Admin / Developer

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Tom Wesley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 402 bytes --]

On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 18:18, Ajai Khattri wrote:
> I would like to have an ebuild apply a patch based on whether a USE flag
> is set or not - what is the standard way to do this in an ebuild? (Or is
> there some function already available to do it?).

You can

        if use nntp; then
            epatch ${DISTDIR}/${nntp_patch}
        fi

snipped and edited from the mutt ebuild

Tom

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Lars Strojny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 961 bytes --]

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:20:48 +0100
Tom Wesley <tom.wesley@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 18:18, Ajai Khattri wrote:
> > I would like to have an ebuild apply a patch based on whether a USE flag
> > is set or not - what is the standard way to do this in an ebuild? (Or is
> > there some function already available to do it?).
> 
> You can
> 
>         if use nntp; then
>             epatch ${DISTDIR}/${nntp_patch}
>         fi

I think 
if [ "`use nntp`" ] ; then
is more elegant ;)

Greets
Lars Strojny
-- 
"Es genügt nicht, nur fleißig zu sein - das sind die Ameisen.
 Die Frage ist vielmehr: wofür sind wir fleißig?"
      - Henry David Thoreau - 
 
name: Lars Strojny         web: http://strojny.net 
street: Yorckstrasse 22    jabber: sinistra@amessage.de
city: D-71636 Ludwigsburg  mail: lars@strojny.net
f-print: 6663 1055 543E 3106 3FD3  4F40 AC74 CD1F C327 14BD
weblog: http://sinistra.is-a-geek.net/l_blog

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-]

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Lars Strojny wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:20:48 +0100
> Tom Wesley <tom.wesley@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 18:18, Ajai Khattri wrote:
> > > I would like to have an ebuild apply a patch based on whether a USE flag
> > > is set or not - what is the standard way to do this in an ebuild? (Or is
> > > there some function already available to do it?).
> > 
> > You can
> > 
> >         if use nntp; then
> >             epatch ${DISTDIR}/${nntp_patch}
> >         fi
> 
> I think 
> if [ "`use nntp`" ] ; then
> is more elegant ;)

Between the two, the first example is preferred.

Michael Sterrett
  -Mr. Bones.-
mr_bones_@gentoo.org

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Don Seiler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 549 bytes --]

On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 03:33:31PM -0400, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> > >         if use nntp; then
> > >             epatch ${DISTDIR}/${nntp_patch}
> > >         fi
> > 
> > I think 
> > if [ "`use nntp`" ] ; then
> > is more elegant ;)
> 
> Between the two, the first example is preferred.

Except that you may want ${FILESDIR} and not ${DISTDIR}.  I still prefer
the 'use flag && epatch blah' syntax.

-- 
Don Seiler             rizzo@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux Developer      net-im Herd
http://dev.gentoo.org/~rizzo/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thursday 29 April 2004 03:33 pm, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Lars Strojny wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:20:48 +0100
> > Tom Wesley <tom.wesley@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > > You can
> > >
> > >         if use nntp; then
> > >             epatch ${DISTDIR}/${nntp_patch}
> > >         fi
> >
> > I think
> > if [ "`use nntp`" ] ; then
> > is more elegant ;)
>
> Between the two, the first example is preferred.

and by prefered he means 'do not use the following syntax anymore in ebuilds':
[ `use nntp` ]
[ "`use nntp`" ]
[ -z "`use nntp`" ]
[ -n "`use nntp`" ]
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] use.local.desc mess

[Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-]

There's a bunch of lines missing from the use.local.desc file.

Please find yours and do something about it:

app-admin/amanda: pic
app-admin/amanda: xfs
app-admin/webalizer: geoip
app-emulation/wine: nptl
app-laptop/tpctl: tpctlir
app-office/gnumeric: gnomedb
app-office/pointless: freetype
app-sci/blas-reference: ifc
dev-dotnet/mono: nptl
dev-java/sun-j2sdk: nptl
dev-libs/pwlib: ieee1394
dev-libs/redland: php
dev-lisp/clisp: threads
dev-lisp/sbcl: threads
dev-scheme/bigloo-lib: expat
dev-scheme/bigloo-lib: ipcs
dev-util/monodevelop: nptl
gnome-base/gnome-vfs: gnutls
media-gfx/gimp: mng
media-gfx/gnuplot: xemacs
media-gfx/opendx: cdf
media-gfx/opendx: hdf
media-libs/openvrml: javascript
media-sound/ardour: ardour-ksi
media-sound/rhythmbox: faad
media-sound/terminatorx: sox
media-video/vlc: faad
net-dialup/gammu: bluetooth
net-dialup/gammu: irda
net-libs/c-client: pic
net-libs/libvncserver: no24bpp
net-libs/libvncserver: nobackchannel
net-mail/clamav: milter
net-mail/sendmail: milter
net-mail/uw-imap: pic
net-misc/neon: expat
net-wireless/hostap-driver: hostap-nopci
net-wireless/hostap-driver: hostap-noplx
net-www/apache: threads
sys-apps/iproute2: atm
sys-apps/partimage: nologin
sys-devel/gcc: objc
sys-devel/gcc: uclibc
sys-devel/hardened-gcc: multilib
sys-devel/hardened-gcc: nogcj
sys-devel/libperl: threads
sys-kernel/alpha-sources: usagi
sys-kernel/development-sources: ultra1
sys-kernel/hppa-sources: xfs
sys-kernel/ppc-sources-benh: xfs
sys-kernel/ppc64-sources: extlib
sys-libs/libcap: pic
x11-base/xfree: pie
x11-base/xorg-x11: pie
x11-base/xorg-x11: sdk
x11-libs/fltk: nptl
x11-libs/gtk-sharp: gnomedb
x11-plugins/gkrellm-trayicons: mpeg4
x11-terms/rxvt-unicode: xgetdefault

I haven't verified all of these to be actually used in the ebuild,
but they are part of the the IUSE variable.  If they're not used, they
should be removed from the IUSE variable.  If they are used, they need
to be either added to use.local.desc with the appropriate description or
brought up for discussion to be added to use.desc.

Thanks,

Michael Sterrett
  -Mr. Bones.-
mr_bones_@gentoo.org

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] use.local.desc mess

[George Shapovalov]

On Thursday 29 April 2004 18:35, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> There's a bunch of lines missing from the use.local.desc file.
>
> app-sci/blas-reference: ifc
This is a work in progress, blas-reference is hardmasked atm and I did not 
want to spam use.local.desc before it is necessary :). It will be added in a 
due course, when blas stuff will get unmasked (and goes into ~arch), which 
should happen soon now (this will be a subject of a detailed announcement 
about new blas/lapack structure. This was already discussed some time ago on 
this list and, finally, its implementation is nearing completion :)).

George


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] use.local.desc mess

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 539 bytes --]

On Friday 30 April 2004 03:35, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> There's a bunch of lines missing from the use.local.desc file.
>
> Please find yours and do something about it:
> app-emulation/wine: nptl
> dev-dotnet/mono: nptl
> dev-java/sun-j2sdk: nptl
> dev-util/monodevelop: nptl
> x11-libs/fltk: nptl

nptl is a global useflag that is used to specify that things need to be build 
run with the nptl library.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] use.local.desc mess

[Jason Stubbs]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 30 April 2004 21:54, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Friday 30 April 2004 03:35, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> > There's a bunch of lines missing from the use.local.desc file.
> >
> > Please find yours and do something about it:
> > app-emulation/wine: nptl
> > dev-dotnet/mono: nptl
> > dev-java/sun-j2sdk: nptl
> > dev-util/monodevelop: nptl
> > x11-libs/fltk: nptl
>
> nptl is a global useflag that is used to specify that things need to be
> build run with the nptl library.

That's Michael's point. nptl is only listed in use.local.desc under glibc. 
Judging by its usage, it should probably be moved to use.desc.

Regards,
Jason Stubbs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBQJJrk1oikN4/5jfsAQKgygQAmN4aIlmMAjqtU1Hn1chqbO8Qq4HF04mE
CGBXM6nrpN6RaPW2FRGDnI8Y2WydO4K9mYie5+pm8kz1SokuAQySktCQ1mUPoFg/
bNZVRWzezsDKPkKRY4fWyJOrthcX10LZwih4yCmw0ApRpcBnp4wZceKfVwvV2F79
lJ74014m8a8=
=mXR+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] use.local.desc mess

[Sven Vermeulen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 637 bytes --]

On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 02:54:59PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> nptl is a global useflag that is used to specify that things need to be build 
> run with the nptl library.

I thought only glibc took advantage of NPTL? And that all tools that are
build against an NPTL-enabled GLIBC use NPTL for threading.

If not, anyone know of a decent document explaining NPTL (and a bit in-depth
please, I'm not afraid of challenges :)? 

Wkr,
      Sven Vermeulen

-- 
 ^__^   And Larry saw that it was Good.
 (oo)                                      Sven Vermeulen
 (__)   http://www.gentoo.org              Documentation & PR

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] use.local.desc mess

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 882 bytes --]

On Friday 30 April 2004 17:22, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 02:54:59PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > nptl is a global useflag that is used to specify that things need to be
> > build run with the nptl library.
>
> I thought only glibc took advantage of NPTL? And that all tools that are
> build against an NPTL-enabled GLIBC use NPTL for threading.
>
> If not, anyone know of a decent document explaining NPTL (and a bit
> in-depth please, I'm not afraid of challenges :)?

Some packages do all kinds of freaky stuff with threads that is not exactly 
using public interfaces. Those packages normally need some kind of persuasion 
to compile/run with nptl. (Wine is one of them, but it's freaky things could 
be justified by its nature)

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Brett I. Holcomb]

For the sake of one who is doing ebuilds - why is the first form
preferred?  I'm curious.  I'm working on revising an ebuild now that has
the bad form.

Thanks.

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Mike Frysinger wrote:

> On Thursday 29 April 2004 03:33 pm, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Lars Strojny wrote:
> > > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:20:48 +0100
> > > Tom Wesley <tom.wesley@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > > > You can
> > > >
> > > >         if use nntp; then
> > > >             epatch ${DISTDIR}/${nntp_patch}
> > > >         fi
> > >
> > > I think
> > > if [ "`use nntp`" ] ; then
> > > is more elegant ;)
> >
> > Between the two, the first example is preferred.
>
> and by prefered he means 'do not use the following syntax anymore in ebuilds':
> [ `use nntp` ]
> [ "`use nntp`" ]
> [ -z "`use nntp`" ]
> [ -n "`use nntp`" ]
> -mike
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>

-- 
Brett I. Holcomb

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Georgi Georgiev]

maillog: 29/04/2004-22:27:22(-0400): Brett I. Holcomb types
> For the sake of one who is doing ebuilds - why is the first form
> preferred?  I'm curious.  I'm working on revising an ebuild now that has
> the bad form.

Related to the question: I really hate it when ebuild start printing out use
flags here and there, because of the 

if use foo; then... 
use foo && ...

syntax. I guess [ "`use foo`" ] is at least cleaner in respect to output. It
would be great if "use" did not print anything, or if there was an alternate.
Right now, one would have to add ">/dev/null" after "use", if they want to keep
the output clean. Is the reason why using the output of "use foo" is not
preferred, because "use" will soon become silent?

> Thanks.
> 
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> 
> > On Thursday 29 April 2004 03:33 pm, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> > > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Lars Strojny wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:20:48 +0100
> > > > Tom Wesley <tom.wesley@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > > > > You can
> > > > >
> > > > >         if use nntp; then
> > > > >             epatch ${DISTDIR}/${nntp_patch}
> > > > >         fi
> > > >
> > > > I think
> > > > if [ "`use nntp`" ] ; then
> > > > is more elegant ;)
> > >
> > > Between the two, the first example is preferred.
> >
> > and by prefered he means 'do not use the following syntax anymore in ebuilds':
> > [ `use nntp` ]
> > [ "`use nntp`" ]
> > [ -z "`use nntp`" ]
> > [ -n "`use nntp`" ]

-- 
\    Georgi Georgiev   \  To love is good, love being difficult.       \
/     chutz@gg3.net    /                                               /
\   +81(90)6266-1163   \                                               \

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thursday 29 April 2004 11:12 pm, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> maillog: 29/04/2004-22:27:22(-0400): Brett I. Holcomb types
>
> > For the sake of one who is doing ebuilds - why is the first form
> > preferred?  I'm curious.  I'm working on revising an ebuild now that has
> > the bad form.
>
> Related to the question: I really hate it when ebuild start printing out
> use flags here and there, because of the

which is *exactly* why we want to stop using the forms i cited :P

those forms require that use echo something in order for them to be true ... 
if we convert all the forms over to just:
use nntp
if use nntp ; then
then we can make 'use' stop echoing crap and then introduce a 'usev' for the 
case when we actually want `use` to echo something
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1235 bytes --]

On Thu, 2004-04-29, 23:35:28 -0400, in <200404292335.28405.vapier@gentoo.org>, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thursday 29 April 2004 11:12 pm, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> > maillog: 29/04/2004-22:27:22(-0400): Brett I. Holcomb types
> >
> > > For the sake of one who is doing ebuilds - why is the first form
> > > preferred?  I'm curious.  I'm working on revising an ebuild now that has
> > > the bad form.
> >
> > Related to the question: I really hate it when ebuild start printing out
> > use flags here and there, because of the
> 
> which is *exactly* why we want to stop using the forms i cited :P
> 
> those forms require that use echo something in order for them to be true ... 
> if we convert all the forms over to just:
> use nntp
> if use nntp ; then
> then we can make 'use' stop echoing crap and then introduce a 'usev' for the 
> case when we actually want `use` to echo something

We already have `use-with` and `use-enable` for that. Was the output
from `use` ever used in any context other than "[ `use foo` ]" and
friends?

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 30 April 2004 02:25 am, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-04-29, 23:35:28 -0400, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> 
wrote:
> We already have `use-with` and `use-enable` for that. Was the output
> from `use` ever used in any context other than "[ `use foo` ]" and
> friends?

use_with and use_enable do completely different things

ive personally used the fact that use echos the flag when building 
packages ... for example, a package with a crapy build system:
for vid in `use sdl` `use X` `use opengl` `use svga` ; do
    make clean
    make VID=$vid
    mv binary ../binary.$vid
done
*much* more often the fact that the use flag is echoed is not used

we will continue to hunt down useless applications of [ "`use blah`" ] and the 
like in the portage tree so that we can transition to `usev` ... so stop 
trying to fight the machine ... i know I WILL NOT BE A ROBOT
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1373 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-04-30, 02:31:39 -0400, in
<200404300231.39292.vapier@gentoo.org>, Mike Frysinger
<vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Friday 30 April 2004 02:25 am, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> > We already have `use-with` and `use-enable` for that. Was the output
> > from `use` ever used in any context other than "[ `use foo` ]" and
> > friends?
> 
> ive personally used the fact that use echos the flag when building
> packages ... for example, a package with a crapy build system:
> for vid in `use sdl` `use X` `use opengl` `use svga` ; do
>     make clean
>     make VID=$vid
>     mv binary ../binary.$vid
> done

That's beautiful. Now, there's an example of elegance!
I imagine, though, that our USE flags and other developers' naming
schemes are just sufficiently divergent to make this sort of opportunity
rare.

> we will continue to hunt down useless applications of [ "`use blah`" ] and the 
> like in the portage tree so that we can transition to `usev` ... so stop 
> trying to fight the machine ... i know I WILL NOT BE A ROBOT

*blink* *blink*
This would be an example of something else. ;-)

I noticed the `useq()` function. Are we trying to phase out the use of
`use()` alltogether?

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[sf]

Drake Wyrm wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-04-30, 02:31:39 -0400, in
> <200404300231.39292.vapier@gentoo.org>, Mike Frysinger
> <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>>On Friday 30 April 2004 02:25 am, Drake Wyrm wrote:
...
>>ive personally used the fact that use echos the flag when building
>>packages ... for example, a package with a crapy build system:
>>for vid in `use sdl` `use X` `use opengl` `use svga` ; do
>>    make clean
>>    make VID=$vid
>>    mv binary ../binary.$vid
>>done
> 
> 
> That's beautiful. Now, there's an example of elegance!

Beautiful? It is an example of code replication!

What about about the following?

for vid in sdl X opengl svga; do
     if use $vid; then
         make clean
         make VID=$vid
         mv binary ../binary.$vid
     fi
done


Regards

	Stephan


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1044 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-04-30, 14:18:39 +0200, in <4092441F.70205@b-i-t.de>, sf
<sf@b-i-t.de> wrote:
> Drake Wyrm wrote:
> >On Fri, 2004-04-30, 02:31:39 -0400, in
> ><200404300231.39292.vapier@gentoo.org>, Mike Frysinger
> ><vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> >>On Friday 30 April 2004 02:25 am, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> ...
> >>ive personally used the fact that use echos the flag when building
> >>packages ... for example, a package with a crapy build system:
> >>for vid in `use sdl` `use X` `use opengl` `use svga` ; do
> >>   make clean
> >>   make VID=$vid
> >>   mv binary ../binary.$vid
> >>done
> >
> >
> >That's beautiful. Now, there's an example of elegance!
> 
> Beautiful? It is an example of code replication!

Maybe. Then again, maybe I just get a kick out of seeing somebody do
something useful with anything I consider to be useless (e.g. the output
from `use`).

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 30 April 2004 03:48 am, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> I noticed the `useq()` function. Are we trying to phase out the use of
> `use()` alltogether?

that was an uniformed attempt by nick to handle the verbose problem ... i 
believe the opposite approach is better (use + usev instead of use + useq) 
since the *majority* of the time useq should be used ...

as for the example i gave, yes there is an effective solution to it, i just 
never thought of that ;)
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Jason Huebel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mike Frysinger wrote:
| and by prefered he means 'do not use the following syntax anymore in
ebuilds':
| [ `use nntp` ]
| [ "`use nntp`" ]
| [ -z "`use nntp`" ]
| [ -n "`use nntp`" ]
| -mike

So, is this still cool then? It isn't on your list of no-no's...

use nntp && epatch ${FILESDIR}/my-nifty-nntp.patch

Jason Huebel
Gentoo/amd64 Lead
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFAlwOdbNgbbJup4jARAmrdAKCQVQqDlF94OsXIAmcka9yibiFMzQCggYkI
st1kz7rm2tDdk285vNZ5/zI=
=EmSD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Mike Frysinger]

On Monday 03 May 2004 10:44 pm, Jason Huebel wrote:
> So, is this still cool then? It isn't on your list of no-no's...
>
> use nntp && epatch ${FILESDIR}/my-nifty-nntp.patch

thats because that is very different from the ones i cited ... that's the way 
it should be done
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wednesday 05 May 2004 09:08 pm, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> For curiosity and learning - why are the forms below bad?  What do they do
> to an ebuild?

they 'work' because `use` echo's a string
if we change use to only return 0/1 (shell true/false), then those forms will 
all stop working
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Apply patch depending on USE flag

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 387 bytes --]

On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 13:18, Ajai Khattri wrote:
> I would like to have an ebuild apply a patch based on whether a USE flag
> is set or not - what is the standard way to do this in an ebuild? (Or is
> there some function already available to do it?).

use useflag && epatch patchname

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Games Team

Is your power animal a pengiun?

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]