From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78AD1139694 for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 06:53:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EB91821C164; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 06:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DE3F21C09D for ; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 06:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot (d202-252.icpnet.pl [109.173.202.252]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E88DB33BEFC; Sat, 18 Mar 2017 06:53:35 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1489820011.1289.1.camel@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Master plan for fixing elibtoolize From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 07:53:31 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20170317233836.13b5de95@symphony.aura-online.co.uk> References: <1489770852.1490.6.camel@gentoo.org> <20170317233836.13b5de95@symphony.aura-online.co.uk> Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-l/ALcutOnpOdmD/Oh831" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Archives-Salt: e56513f1-2d6f-4586-b6a3-9a596a72f433 X-Archives-Hash: 2e58831ee9348fc8d094d6c0ae0f6351 --=-l/ALcutOnpOdmD/Oh831 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On pi=C4=85, 2017-03-17 at 23:38 +0000, James Le Cuirot wrote: > On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 18:14:12 +0100 > Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >=20 > > Hi, everyone. > >=20 > > Since the bug about libtool.eclass [1] has not received any attention, = I > > hereby declare maintainer timeout and start working on improving > > the eclass. > >=20 > > The main goals are to: > >=20 > > a. stop requiring every single autoconf ebuild to call elibtoolize > > manually (and effectively having half-'broken' repository), >=20 > Good! This will help immensely with cross-compiling. >=20 > > 1.1. split the function into new eclass (PATCH already sent), >=20 > The function itself is quite complex. Perhaps this should also go into > a separate package? Are you talking about epunt_cxx or elibtoolize now? (this point was about epunt_cxx) If the latter, yes, I think it makes sense to split the patching logic into a separate script. > > 3. copy elibtoolize logic to Portage, and make it apply implicitly > > on econf [do we need to apply it elsewhere?]; disable explicit > > libtoolize when Portage supports that. >=20 > Related to the above point, if you make it part of econf then it needs > to be part of PMS and that's quite a complex beast to have in the spec. > It has been suggested twice on this list (once quite recently) that the > script itself should put into a separate package for this reason. Then > PMS just needs to say "install and use this script" without any further > detail. Strictly speaking, you don't have to have it in the PMS. This can be left purely as Portage extension, much like gnuconfig hacking is right now. > Back in September, I tried turning the eclass into an external script > with very few changes to start with, just as a proof of concept. I > removed the few references to other eclass helpers but still retained a > little dependence on variables exported by Portage. I then stuck a call > to this to near the top of econf() and tried out some packages, > including those that had failed on me before. It worked very well > indeed. I don't recall encountering any issues. Nice, that was exactly my plan. I'll create a git.g.o repo for this in a few days, and commit the patches there. Would you be interested in working on splitting the script again/updating your stand-alone version? --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --=-l/ALcutOnpOdmD/Oh831 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKTBAABCgB9FiEEXr8g+Zb7PCLMb8pAur8dX/jIEQoFAljM2WtfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDVF QkYyMEY5OTZGQjNDMjJDQzZGQ0E0MEJBQkYxRDVGRjhDODExMEEACgkQur8dX/jI EQphoBAAuskI3njMw8jX4cluJlvYqndwdRlX2zygUolbMaWO1DOpGyjNWXUWuWlx RzPNqpljdT44fWxF/cdq1oFAz+chEps6GhK5ERzGwSN94F33noHS2UiU6E0TJW6V AKDNN7FwUcaOB6NhFcXegpIHAVVBRnUoA58K8hIuJSuSHLzBpUJSAK6BAjGNHp89 2d3P1DYK2QEE9Uskmh/X1tGjkK1Mm3Cf1SkZP0U0zWHYo7zfcDM75w0ReuWrr9o7 AhtptluF8GK+QXtnf7gH8ssGZ0IL2edGKR2IxoQMLfONaxWwY7HzzfuaGQhcHqa7 6xYTAKPwFEIVv/w7Y1UtDmaepqGkN0vRkv/y9bBxiFPM8D3kuFP2fOprhqKCrVDN LyK4R9exUZYBHNxfy+pEv1KkHKk3sbIK27TcfyOQEzZ8w7y2WD5T54RTDTrSfGC4 fsHNWOQIgm43l5dpHn0qaOiUcF86wAUeFXaDPbCQgRtBQfGtwQZumJjKXpL2An/b IhjFgRYZVrhgqioEjLoSseIurzI62sg3Mqhm0FRIyExwp1GpF96MC247AQQp49su X3qke5UXbXhb8ieXp4lPZl1RvCKZTAyS3bN+aS6OxC2RN9jJUgD2Oa/D9Cw3VHXd Y8Wn+s3OBGEW1Y6GqodvXj73+zW2+b8A4DdpZeV1hl2UJ4wyEOw= =dWkr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-l/ALcutOnpOdmD/Oh831--