From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-6460-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1RKiyx-0005p0-5M
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:56:19 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C0CC321C040
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:56:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j931KL5s010422
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 3 Oct 2005 01:20:22 GMT
Received: from 82-41-57-20.cable.ubr08.edin.blueyonder.co.uk ([82.41.57.20] helo=snowdrop.home)
	by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EMF7t-0002w0-L6
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2005 01:28:21 +0000
Received: from localhost.home ([127.0.0.1] helo=snowdrop.home)
	by snowdrop.home with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1EMF8K-0006YM-Rz
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2005 02:28:48 +0100
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 02:28:46 +0100
From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuild limits?
Message-ID: <20051003022846.4e35d707@snowdrop.home>
In-Reply-To: <200510022048.27711.dnebinger@joat.com>
References: <200510021958.31893.dnebinger@joat.com>
	<20051003010858.5eeba011@snowdrop.home>
	<200510022048.27711.dnebinger@joat.com>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.13 (GTK+ 2.6.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
 boundary=Signature_Mon__3_Oct_2005_02_28_46_+0100_KDQ_qMoGh3ZobT6.;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1
X-Archives-Salt: 4765c902-df65-411c-92ec-349959d14b40
X-Archives-Hash: 7559b029938d2160756c0c79423fce69

--Signature_Mon__3_Oct_2005_02_28_46_+0100_KDQ_qMoGh3ZobT6.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 20:48:27 -0400 Dave Nebinger <dnebinger@joat.com>
wrote:
| So yeah, things are pretty complicated due to the upstream build
| system expectations.

I suggest hitting upstream with a cluebat until they make a proper
build system.

| 1. Can I use /usr/local/portage/eclass for development/testing?

Portage is kinda broken with eclasses in overlay... It'll work, so long
as you remember to touch all affected ebuilds every time you change the
eclass.

| 2. Do I create a single eclass, i.e. zimbra.eclass, to represent an
| eclass for a specific package or do I generate multiple eclasses
| based upon functionality?

Well... If it's really an eclass for a whole package, it may not be
worth packaging the thing at all.

| a /var/db/pkg query system,

Yick! Bad bad bad idea.

| 3. Do eclasses get submitted on the same bug report as the ebuild
| submission, or do they get a bug report of their own?

All in one bug's usually easier.

--=20
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


--Signature_Mon__3_Oct_2005_02_28_46_+0100_KDQ_qMoGh3ZobT6.
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDQIlQ96zL6DUtXhERAhVcAJ92XOkPg9vG32ZiEU5Kw6PAmaWGBACdGHvU
qY6gh7fp5bkzcsJuQXrdvLg=
=wY4z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Signature_Mon__3_Oct_2005_02_28_46_+0100_KDQ_qMoGh3ZobT6.--
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list