[gentoo-dev] Review a new (unofficial) eclass

[gentoo-dev] Review a new (unofficial) eclass

[Nick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1761 bytes --]

Hi there,

I've been working on an eclass and associated ebuilds for the 
linux-libre [1] kernels. It's just linux with bits which they 
consider unfree are removed. It's a project of FSFLA.

The reason I chose to do most of the work in an eclass rather than 
the ebuild is so I can very easily take other kernel versions in the 
tree and combine them with the linux-libre kernel (I've written an 
ebuild for the vanilla libre kernel, and one including the gentoo 
patcheset).  Also it means the ebuilds can remain almost unchanged 
from their official kernel counterparts.

Please can you let me know what you think of the eclass & ebuilds; 
any suggestions, criticisms, questions etc? This is my first time 
writing an eclass, and to me it all feels quite nice and solid, but 
that's the sort of thing which could quickly and harshly disproved 
;-)

I'll then attach the eclass & ebuilds to bug #266157 [2]. 

URLs:

kernel-libre.eclass [3]
libre-sources.eclass [4]
libregentoo-sources.eclass [5]

Many thanks, in advance, for anything you have to offer.

Nick White

[1] http://www.fsfla.org/svnwiki/selibre/linux-libre/
[2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=266157
[3] 
http://git.njw.me.uk/cgit/cgit.cgi/njw-gentoo-local/plain/eclass/kernel-libre.eclass
[4] 
http://git.njw.me.uk/cgit/cgit.cgi/njw-gentoo-local/plain/sys-kernel/libre-sources/libre-sources-2.6.30.ebuild
[5] 
http://git.njw.me.uk/cgit/cgit.cgi/njw-gentoo-local/plain/sys-kernel/libregentoo-sources/libregentoo-sources-2.6.30-r1.ebuild

-- 
GPG     : 0x04E4653F / 9732 D7C7 A441 D79E FDF0 94F6 1F48 5674 04E4 653F
IM /OTR : njw@jabber.org / 7E3C82CC D6AB2CEA E8000300 E429A122 D984111B
SIP/ZRTP: njw@ekiga.net
WWW     : http://www.njw.me.uk

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Review a new (unofficial) eclass

[Christian Faulhammer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 648 bytes --]

Hi,

Nick <gentoo-dev-list@njw.me.uk>:
> Please can you let me know what you think of the eclass & ebuilds; 
> any suggestions, criticisms, questions etc? This is my first time 
> writing an eclass, and to me it all feels quite nice and solid, but 
> that's the sort of thing which could quickly and harshly disproved 
> ;-)

 You could make it EAPI 2 safe and use the src_prepare function for all
your tarball magic.  See other eclasses that handle EAPI case switching.

V-Li

-- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Review a new (unofficial) eclass

[Tomáš Chvátal]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 329 bytes --]

Dne úterý 16 Červen 2009 18:34:46 Christian Faulhammer napsal(a):
>  You could make it EAPI 2 safe and use the src_prepare function for all
> your tarball magic.  See other eclasses that handle EAPI case switching.
Specialy x-modular, git or cmake-utils
It has most readable output, when we get to more eapis :]

Tomas

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Review a new (unofficial) eclass

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 786 bytes --]

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:06:02 +0100
Nick <gentoo-dev-list@njw.me.uk> wrote:
> Please can you let me know what you think of the eclass & ebuilds; 
> any suggestions, criticisms, questions etc? This is my first time 
> writing an eclass, and to me it all feels quite nice and solid, but 
> that's the sort of thing which could quickly and harshly disproved 
> ;-)

You *really* shouldn't be messing around with things in DISTDIR the way
you are. That's just plain horrible. The only reason DISTDIR isn't
forcibly read-only is that the scm eclasses need to write to
subdirectories of it.

Just do your own unpack if you can't handle it.

Also, is that really the best way of generating SRC_URI? Can't you
remove the need to put anything in ebuilds?

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Review a new (unofficial) eclass

[Nick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1133 bytes --]

Quoth Ciaran McCreesh:
> You *really* shouldn't be messing around with things in DISTDIR the way
> you are. That's just plain horrible. The only reason DISTDIR isn't
> forcibly read-only is that the scm eclasses need to write to
> subdirectories of it.
> 
> Just do your own unpack if you can't handle it.

Good plan. That's how I was doing it, then I got a bit carried away 
with trying to not duplicate any of the kernel-2 eclass, but you're 
right, it turned out horrible. I've replaced the relevant kernel-2 
function now, which is much nicer.

> Also, is that really the best way of generating SRC_URI? Can't you
> remove the need to put anything in ebuilds?

I think it is the best way, unless you have a specific reason not 
to. This way the different kernel ebuilds need very little 
modification to use the libre base.

Thanks for the feedback. Anything else at all would be welcome.

Nick

-- 
GPG     : 0x04E4653F / 9732 D7C7 A441 D79E FDF0 94F6 1F48 5674 04E4 653F
IM /OTR : njw@jabber.org / 7E3C82CC D6AB2CEA E8000300 E429A122 D984111B
SIP/ZRTP: njw@ekiga.net
WWW     : http://www.njw.me.uk

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]