From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32436 invoked by uid 1002); 29 Apr 2003 23:48:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 5878 invoked from network); 29 Apr 2003 23:48:27 -0000 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 01:54:37 +0200 From: Fernand Albarracin To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20030429235437.GA8993@spirou.test-domain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-In-Reply-To: <1051644714.12019.58.camel@orange-pc.ces.clemson.edu> Subject: [gentoo-dev] ebuild inconsistencies (was: Community driven meta distribution or only distribution) X-Archives-Salt: 0c4d6c21-0d97-4433-9061-bacaee7011a2 X-Archives-Hash: 170a17d289e2c81f430cdca8e0d2af9c Hi, On Tue 29 Apr 2003 at 15:31:54 -0400, Grant Goodyear wrote: > A good "reference" ebuild can be found by "man 5 ebuild". Just checked it, and have few remarks. Here is a part of the supplied sample ebuild : src_compile() { econf || die "could not configure" emake || die "emake failed" } An here is the revelant documentation : ... *Note: There is no need to use '|| die' because econf checks for you ... *Note: Be sure to use '|| die' constructs to ensure emake success 1. The example should be updated. src_compile() { econf emake || die "emake failed" } 2. It might be a good idea to change emake so that it works just like econf and einstall. What do you think ? Goal: get a simpler, more consistent API. Also right now econf is implemented as a function, and emake as a program. Is there a good reason for this ? Sure, it does not really matter from an ebuild writter point of view, it's more a "spring cleanup" kind of suggestion. Ok, enough for today :) Fernand -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list