From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-54179-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D7E9138010
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 07:01:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 915A8E056C;
	Sun, 26 Aug 2012 07:00:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82589E049A
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 06:59:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.43] (unknown [96.231.195.182])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: tetromino)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BAB7633D78B
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 06:59:47 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <1345964385.9829.80.camel@rook>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] new vala.eclass
From: Alexandre Rostovtsev <tetromino@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 02:59:45 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20537.18304.877062.568911@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
References: <1345910966.9829.9.camel@rook> <1345928676.9829.13.camel@rook>
	 <20537.18304.877062.568911@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4 
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 91dd5da8-ff49-4070-b858-6b2944b59d2f
X-Archives-Hash: 4b6228f0132c5d68498643ea87e2f2b6

On Sat, 2012-08-25 at 23:45 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
> 
> > 	export VALAC=$(type -P valac-${VALA_API_VERSION})
> > 	export VALA=$(type -P vala-${VALA_API_VERSION})
> > 	export VALA_GEN_INTROSPECT=$(type -P vala-gen-introspect-${VALA_API_VERSION})
> > 	export VAPIGEN="$(type -P vapigen-${VALA_API_VERSION})"
> 
> Is it guaranteed that these commands are present at pkg_setup time?

I am assuming that the ebuild writer has added the correct vala
dependency to DEPEND. Maybe something like this:

VALA_API_VERSION=0.16
DEPEND="vala? ( >=dev-lang/vala-0.16.1:${VALA_API_VERSION}[vapigen] )"

In which case, the vala commands that are pulled in via DEPEND will be
(unless I am completely wrong about how pkg_config works) available
during pkg_config.

Commands that are not pulled in via DEPEND of course might not be
available, in which case VALAC or VAPIGEN etc. would be set to the empty
string by vala_pkg_config. 

For all vala-using build systems that I have seen, this should not break
anything.

However, for a cleaner and safer environment, I could do the following:

	local path

	path=$(type -P valac-${VALA_API_VERSION})
	[[ -n "${path}" ]] && VALAC="${path}"

	path=$(type -P vala-${VALA_API_VERSION})
	[[ -n "${path}" ]] && VALA="${path}"

	path=$(type -P vala-gen-introspect-${VALA_API_VERSION})
	[[ -n "${path}" ]] && VALA_GEN_INTROSPECT="${path}"

	path=$(type -P vapigen-${VALA_API_VERSION})
	[[ -n "${path}" ]] && VAPIGEN="${path}"