[gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Marco Maggesi]

Hello,

I am looking for someone to review my first attempt at writing an
ebuild.  Please look at:

  http://www.math.unifi.it/~maggesi/portage/app-misc/hello/

I have a question, also: how can I figure out the good values for
DEPEND and RDEPEND?  (Without reading all the sources, of course).

My next goal is to write an ebuild for the monotone version control
system: http://www.venge.net/monotone/
The current version I am working on can be found in:

  http://www.math.unifi.it/~maggesi/portage/dev-util/monotone/

at the moment I have a problem during compilation.  The usual
"configure && make" works fine in the root console, but fails in the
ebuild.  Why?  Is it due to the fact that there are different
environmental variables (e.g., CFLAGS)

Thanks,

  -- Marco


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1267 bytes --]

begin  quote
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 12:39:34 +0000 (UTC)
Marco Maggesi <maggesi@math.unice.fr> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I am looking for someone to review my first attempt at writing an
> ebuild.  Please look at:
> 
>   http://www.math.unifi.it/~maggesi/portage/app-misc/hello/

SRC_URI="http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/hello/hello-2.1.1.tar.gz"

use 
SRC_URI="http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/${PN}/${P}.tar.gz" 
instead, as its less intense on maintainance (no need to update inside
the ebuild for a simple bump)





KEYWORDS="x86 ~alpha ~ppc ~mips ~hppa ~sparc arm"

Is that really right? has it had testing by developer on all the
~<arch>?
has it really been in the tree for long enough to be deemed a stable
ebuild on both x86 and arm?




Don't emake  and econf both fail if they fail, making || die ""  
unnecessary and even impossible?




There's no ChangeLog in the directory.



> I have a question, also: how can I figure out the good values for
> DEPEND and RDEPEND?  (Without reading all the sources, of course).

configure.in is usually a good source.

README too.

And unpacking an empty stage3 and testing in works



//Spider

-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

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

[gentoo-dev] Re: My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Marco Maggesi]

[...]
> SRC_URI="http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/hello/hello-2.1.1.tar.gz"
>
> use 
> SRC_URI="http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/${PN}/${P}.tar.gz" 
> instead, as its less intense on maintainance (no need to update inside
> the ebuild for a simple bump)

Ok!


> KEYWORDS="x86 ~alpha ~ppc ~mips ~hppa ~sparc arm"
>
> Is that really right? has it had testing by developer on all the
> ~<arch>?
> has it really been in the tree for long enough to be deemed a stable
> ebuild on both x86 and arm?

The missing tilde before arm is a plain error.

I tested on x86.  I do not have the opportunity to test the ebuild on
the other architectures.  I tried to merge, unmerge and I run the
program to test that it actually works.

I did not find in the documentation the list of supported
architectures.  As far as I can guess I suppose it will work.  It is
not enough to prepend the names with tilde?


> Don't emake  and econf both fail if they fail, making || die ""  
> unnecessary and even impossible?

Sorry, I do not understand your question.  I think 'die' is also to
give a better error reporting here.  Anyway my src_compile() follows
the example in 'man 5 ebuild'.


> There's no ChangeLog in the directory.

Ah!  I will add one.


>> I have a question, also: how can I figure out the good values for
>> DEPEND and RDEPEND?  (Without reading all the sources, of course).
>
> configure.in is usually a good source.
>
> README too.
>
> And unpacking an empty stage3 and testing in works

>
>
> //Spider

Ok, thank you for your time.

  -- Marco


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Aron Griffis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 822 bytes --]

Spider wrote:	[Wed Nov 19 2003, 11:48:20AM EST]
> Don't emake  and econf both fail if they fail, making || die ""  
> unnecessary and even impossible?

It's really poor practice to depend on this.  I argued against this
change and was ignored.  Here are some reasons:

    - Calling die from econf/emake defeats the function and line number
      reporting that are part of die.

    - Developers have to keep track of which ebuild.sh functions call
      die and which ones don't.  It's really better to leave the error
      handling in the ebuild in all cases so that the practice is simply
      to call die in all situations where it is appropriate.

Aron

-- 
Aron Griffis
Gentoo Linux Developer (alpha / ia64 / ruby / vim)
Key fingerprint = E3B6 8734 C2D6 B5E5 AE76  FB3A 26B1 C5E3 2010 4EB0


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1045 bytes --]

On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 15:23, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Spider wrote:	[Wed Nov 19 2003, 11:48:20AM EST]
> > Don't emake  and econf both fail if they fail, making || die ""  
> > unnecessary and even impossible?
> 
> It's really poor practice to depend on this.  I argued against this
> change and was ignored.  Here are some reasons:
> 
>     - Calling die from econf/emake defeats the function and line number
>       reporting that are part of die.
> 
>     - Developers have to keep track of which ebuild.sh functions call
>       die and which ones don't.  It's really better to leave the error
>       handling in the ebuild in all cases so that the practice is simply
>       to call die in all situations where it is appropriate.

I agree.  I asked seemant if we could make that official policy:
15:37 <@seemant> g2boojum: I agree 200% with that
15:37 <@seemant> the die *should* be in ebuilds

If nobody complains too loudly, can we get this policy into the docs?

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@gentoo.org>

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Aron Griffis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 588 bytes --]

Grant Goodyear wrote:	[Thu Nov 20 2003, 03:40:46PM EST]
> I agree.  I asked seemant if we could make that official policy:
> 15:37 <@seemant> g2boojum: I agree 200% with that
> 15:37 <@seemant> the die *should* be in ebuilds
> 
> If nobody complains too loudly, can we get this policy into the docs?

If this is becoming policy, could we also remove the dies from
/usr/lib/portage/bin/ebuild.sh?  I would find that... delightful. :-)

-- 
Aron Griffis
Gentoo Linux Developer (alpha / ia64 / ruby / vim)
Key fingerprint = E3B6 8734 C2D6 B5E5 AE76  FB3A 26B1 C5E3 2010 4EB0


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 968 bytes --]

begin  quote
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:23:10 -0500
Aron Griffis <agriffis@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Spider wrote:	[Wed Nov 19 2003, 11:48:20AM EST]
> > Don't emake  and econf both fail if they fail, making || die ""  
> > unnecessary and even impossible?
> 
> It's really poor practice to depend on this.  I argued against this
> change and was ignored.  Here are some reasons:
> 
>     - Calling die from econf/emake defeats the function and line
>     number reporting that are part of die.
> 
>     - Developers have to keep track of which ebuild.sh functions call
>       die and which ones don't.  It's really better to leave the error
>       handling in the ebuild in all cases so that the practice is
>       simply to call die in all situations where it is appropriate.

<AOL />


it only invites confusion.


//Spider

-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[James Harlow]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 12:39:34PM +0000, Marco Maggesi wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I am looking for someone to review my first attempt at writing an
> ebuild.  Please look at:
> 
>   http://www.math.unifi.it/~maggesi/portage/app-misc/hello/

Not related to the contents of the ebuild, but it'd be nice if you told
your webserver that .ebuild files were text/plain.

I'd suggest adding autoconf and automake to the DEPENDS.

The HOMEPAGE sould probably be
http://www.gnu.org/software/hello/hello.html.

-- 
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Marco Maggesi]

On 2003-11-19, James Harlow <james@is.never.wrong.nu> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 12:39:34PM +0000, Marco Maggesi wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I am looking for someone to review my first attempt at writing an
>> ebuild.  Please look at:
>> 
>>   http://www.math.unifi.it/~maggesi/portage/app-misc/hello/
>
> Not related to the contents of the ebuild, but it'd be nice if you told
> your webserver that .ebuild files were text/plain.

I do not know how to do that (roxen webserver), I will ask the system
administrator.  Meanwhile it is possible to use an alternate address

  http://www2.math.unifi.it/~maggesi/portage/app-misc/hello/

(that is "www2" instead of "www") that should handle .ebuild files as
text/plain.


> I'd suggest adding autoconf and automake to the DEPENDS.

I added autoconf, automake as you suggested.  But I do not understand
exactly why this is necessary.  They should not be needed to build from
the tarball.  Can you explain more?


> The HOMEPAGE should probably be
> http://www.gnu.org/software/hello/hello.html.

I agree, I changed the url.

Thank you for your suggestions,

 -- Marco


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[James Harlow]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 06:39:18PM +0000, Marco Maggesi wrote:
> > I'd suggest adding autoconf and automake to the DEPENDS.
>
> I added autoconf, automake as you suggested.  But I do not understand
> exactly why this is necessary.  They should not be needed to build
> from
> the tarball.  Can you explain more?

Ah, I thought it needed auto{conf,make}, it turns out it's just a
good template for them.

--
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign,
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Matthew Kennedy]

James Harlow <james@is.never.wrong.nu> writes:

> On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 06:39:18PM +0000, Marco Maggesi wrote:
>> > I'd suggest adding autoconf and automake to the DEPENDS.
>>
>> I added autoconf, automake as you suggested.  But I do not understand
>> exactly why this is necessary.  They should not be needed to build
>> from
>> the tarball.  Can you explain more?
>
> Ah, I thought it needed auto{conf,make}, it turns out it's just a
> good template for them.

[...]

That's true.  Generally, if the source comes with a configure script
named "configure", then you don't need autotools[1] dependencies.  If
you have to re-create the configure or Makefile.in files from the
configure.in or Makefile.am templates as part of your ebuild, then
you would need to depend on the autotools.

Matt

Footnotes: 
[1]  automake, autoconf, libtool etc.

-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Matthew Kennedy]

Marco Maggesi <maggesi@math.unice.fr> writes:

> Hello,
>
> I am looking for someone to review my first attempt at writing an
> ebuild.  Please look at:
>
>   http://www.math.unifi.it/~maggesi/portage/app-misc/hello/
>
> I have a question, also: how can I figure out the good values for
> DEPEND and RDEPEND?  (Without reading all the sources, of course).

[...]

Hi Marco,

Your ebuild should support the NLS use-flag.

Matt

-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Marco Maggesi]

On 2003-11-19, Matthew Kennedy <mkennedy@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Marco,
>
> Your ebuild should support the NLS use-flag.
>
> Matt
>

Good remark!
I added nls in the new version.

Thanks,
  -- Marco


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] My first ebuild: GNU Hello

[Eldad Zack]

> I am looking for someone to review my first attempt at writing an
> ebuild.  Please look at:

Just a quick tip - You'd want to use lintool to validate your ebuild if 
you plan on submitting it.

lintool style-check and integrity-check your ebuild, and using the 
--show-details flag you can check why does it frown on your ebuild if it 
is not perfect.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list