[gentoo-dev] Questions on creating an ebuild

[gentoo-dev] Questions on creating an ebuild

[Evan Read]

Hi,

I was wanting to create an ebuild of Judy libraries:


http://sourceforge.net/projects/judy

You will notice that there is no version number in the software (because
the "big deal" about this software is the LGPLing of it).  How can one
work around that?  I have, so far, had to have an ebuild filename that
doesn't reflect the name of the tarball AND have had to explicitly state
the name of the tarball (and so not use ${P}).  Can this be worked
around or should I contact the author of the software?

The other thing was the filename of the tarball starts with a capital
("J"). Is this ok?  It works (to have an ebuild file with a lowercase
first letter) but I am assuming if the tarball and the ebuild are to
have the same name, then this also needs to be fixed.

Thanks.

Evan.


-- 
For security use OpenBSD: http://eread.freeshell.org/
"The future comes 60 minutes an hour no matter who you are or what you
do."
        The Screwtape Letters - C.S. Lewis

Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions on creating an ebuild

[Mike Frysinger]

> I was wanting to create an ebuild of Judy libraries:
glad to hear it :)

> http://sourceforge.net/projects/judy
be sure to use the mirror://sourceforge syntax in the SRC_URI variable

> You will notice that there is no version number in the software (because
> the "big deal" about this software is the LGPLing of it).  How can one
> work around that?  I have, so far, had to have an ebuild filename that
> doesn't reflect the name of the tarball AND have had to explicitly state
> the name of the tarball (and so not use ${P}).  Can this be worked
> around or should I contact the author of the software?
in the SRC_URI, just explicitly type the filename rather than doing ${P}.tgz
as for the ebuild naming, for now put the date stamp on it ...
judy-20020627.ebuild

> The other thing was the filename of the tarball starts with a capital
> ("J"). Is this ok?  It works (to have an ebuild file with a lowercase
> first letter) but I am assuming if the tarball and the ebuild are to
> have the same name, then this also needs to be fixed.
source tarballs can be named however they want.
you however better not even think about naming your ebuild with
capital letters ;)
capitalization is a big NONO with ebuild naming ... unforunately,
not everyone has stuck to this.  that does not mean you should also
be one of these deviants :)

hope this helps
-mike

[gentoo-dev] Re: Questions on creating an ebuild

[Matthew Kennedy]

Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> writes:

> > You will notice that there is no version number in the software (because
> > the "big deal" about this software is the LGPLing of it).  How can one
> > work around that?  I have, so far, had to have an ebuild filename that
> > doesn't reflect the name of the tarball AND have had to explicitly state
> > the name of the tarball (and so not use ${P}).  Can this be worked
> > around or should I contact the author of the software?
> in the SRC_URI, just explicitly type the filename rather than doing ${P}.tgz
> as for the ebuild naming, for now put the date stamp on it ...
> judy-20020627.ebuild

I don't believe this is enough. Since the filename does not contain
unique versioning information, it is susceptible to the problem where
the digest becomes out of date with package in SRC_URI.

You need to make a note of this when you submit the ebuild to
bugs.gentoo.org. The developer who handles it will probably download
the source package rename it to include some version information
(probably just a date), create the digest for the ebuild and then
upload the renamed source package it to the distfiles sub-dir on the
mirrors.

I think...

Matt
-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer
Bugs go to http://bugs.gentoo.org!

Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6C25B0A2
Finger Print:  0C61 0CBC C669 5F26 8DBF  006D FBAB 30EA 6C25 B0A2

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Questions on creating an ebuild

[Mike Frysinger]

> I don't believe this is enough. Since the filename does not contain
> unique versioning information, it is susceptible to the problem where
> the digest becomes out of date with package in SRC_URI.

ah but it does in this case ;)
Judy-initial_LGPL.src.tar.gz
how many initial releases are they going to have ?
-mike

Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions on creating an ebuild

[Evan Read]

Hey,

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 02:14:32AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > I was wanting to create an ebuild of Judy libraries:
> glad to hear it :)

This is laying the groundwork for a bogofilter ebuild ;)  But I didn't
want to promise anything until this worked ;)

> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/judy
> be sure to use the mirror://sourceforge syntax in the SRC_URI variable

Not at all familiar with that.  Didn't see that in the developer docs. I 
will look at some of the ebuilds to check that out.
 
> > You will notice that there is no version number in the software (because
> > the "big deal" about this software is the LGPLing of it).  How can one
> > work around that?  I have, so far, had to have an ebuild filename that
> > doesn't reflect the name of the tarball AND have had to explicitly state
> > the name of the tarball (and so not use ${P}).  Can this be worked
> > around or should I contact the author of the software?
> in the SRC_URI, just explicitly type the filename rather than doing ${P}.tgz
> as for the ebuild naming, for now put the date stamp on it ...
> judy-20020627.ebuild

Ok.  Have been doing that for the tarball.  Will do that for the ebuild.

> > The other thing was the filename of the tarball starts with a capital
> > ("J"). Is this ok?  It works (to have an ebuild file with a lowercase
> > first letter) but I am assuming if the tarball and the ebuild are to
> > have the same name, then this also needs to be fixed.
> source tarballs can be named however they want.
> you however better not even think about naming your ebuild with
> capital letters ;)
> capitalization is a big NONO with ebuild naming ... unforunately,
> not everyone has stuck to this.  that does not mean you should also
> be one of these deviants :)


Couldn't agree more.  I think I got some errors when I tried it anyways.  
I prefer the ${p} syntax but this isn't a complicated ebuild.

Though it isn't autoconf'd at all so I can't seem to do --info-dir, 
--man-dir etc. Will have to try to resolve that.  

How do others do it when the upstream's configure script ain't autoconf'd.

On an aside, the author, on the sourceforge page, is requesting help with 
doing the autoconfing and stuff.  I don't have time to learn it.  I wonder 
if someone could offer the author a hand.
 
www.sourcejudy.com

Thanks.

Evan.

> hope this helps
> -mike
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

-- 
Evan Read
http://eread.freeshell.org

"The future comes 60 minutes an hour no matter who you are or what you 
do." 
	The Screwtape Letters - C.S. Lewis

Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions on creating an ebuild

[Henti Smith]

> Though it isn't autoconf'd at all so I can't seem to do --info-dir, 
> --man-dir etc. Will have to try to resolve that.  
> 
> How do others do it when the upstream's configure script ain't autoconf'd.

Ussually it's acually very simply a case of passing the parms with the make command.
Look throught the Makefile and spot the var names for those "there should be some" 

eg.

    emake \
        INFO_DIR=${D}/usr/share/info \
        MAN_DIR=${D}/usr/share/man

If you need a hand with testing the build .. lemme know ... I've been working on my own ebuilds as well 
and love to see how other people do theirs :) 

Henti Smith 

Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions on creating an ebuild

[Evan Read]

On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 18:19, Henti Smith wrote:
> > Though it isn't autoconf'd at all so I can't seem to do --info-dir, 
> > --man-dir etc. Will have to try to resolve that.  
> > 
> > How do others do it when the upstream's configure script ain't autoconf'd.
> 
> Ussually it's acually very simply a case of passing the parms with the make command.
> Look throught the Makefile and spot the var names for those "there should be some" 
> 
> eg.
> 
>     emake \
>         INFO_DIR=${D}/usr/share/info \
>         MAN_DIR=${D}/usr/share/man
> 
> If you need a hand with testing the build .. lemme know ... I've been working on my own ebuilds as well 
> and love to see how other people do theirs :) 

Hey Henti,

Well, I need some help troubleshooting an existing one. It ain't pretty
_and_ it doesn't install!

I have tried heaps of stuff, but for some reason, I am getting sandbox
violations unlinking /opt/Judy (where it installs to by default and
symlinks from /usr/*). The make file is 2500 lines long and does some
nasty stuff to /opt/Judy, so I loathe to change it (at least at the
moment).

I have tried to patch the makefile to no avail.

I wish I had the time right now to send the thing to ya, but it resides
in a VMWare and I need more software to get it out (which I don't have
time to get right now).

If you can suggest why I would get Sandbox violations, in make install,
when unlinking /opt/Judy, I would be grateful.

If not, I will sent the ebuild out tonight.

Thanks!
 
-- 
For security use OpenBSD: http://eread.freeshell.org/
"The future comes 60 minutes an hour no matter who you are or what you
do."
        The Screwtape Letters - C.S. Lewis