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 ) id 1S6nT3-0007s8-RF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:26:05 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A991E0929; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:25:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C77EE08F3 for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:25:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (159-205-88-242.adsl.inetia.pl [159.205.88.242]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E3101B4013; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:25:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 19:27:55 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: leho@kraav.com, linux.gentoo.dev@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: an eclass for github snapshots? Message-ID: <20120311192755.2235a15c@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <3869551.77.1331486738371.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbhy1> References: <3869551.77.1331486738371.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbhy1> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/_PXWHvLXJUh7NhdyguwfmM1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: e5f6cf08-a719-40c9-971d-aad729c2fa6e X-Archives-Hash: 49efa2e7b122310e6b8c3998e4359760 --Sig_/_PXWHvLXJUh7NhdyguwfmM1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 10:25:38 -0700 (PDT) Leho Kraav wrote: > On Monday, May 30, 2011 9:30:02 AM UTC+3, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > >=20 > > Right now, a quick 'grep -l github.*tarball' shows that there are > > about 147 ebuilds in portage using github snapshots. This evaluates > > to 83 different packages. > >=20 > > The problem with github is that it suffixes the tarballs with > > a complete git commit id. This means that the `S' variable > > in the ebuild needs to refer to a long hash changing randomly. Right > > now, the problem is handled in a number of ways: > >=20 > > 1) (from app-admin/rudy) > > 2) (app-emacs/calfw and suggested solution for Sunrise) > > 3) (app-misc/bgrep) > > 4) (app-misc/tmux-mem-cpu-load) > >=20 > > What I'd like to do is creating a small github.eclass, encapsulating > > a common, nice way of handling the S issue. I guess the best > > solution would be to git with something like 2) above, with the > > eclass providing github_src_unpack() for EAPIs 2+. >=20 > What is the current situation with this one? Every once in a while I > run into a github ebuild I need to create and I am not really sure > what to do with it. >=20 > Right now 2) seems like the safest approach. But did anything get > into EAPI? You mean eclass? I submitted one for review but didn't get much of positive feedback on it. I'll commit it anyway soon, just let me double check and do some testing. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/_PXWHvLXJUh7NhdyguwfmM1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAk9c7qsACgkQfXuS5UK5QB3RswQAiRCJNj7qmcCSlsqiR+Siha0a hbz6EfNPxPCArQHfK6h3nd/GW5hF9NLepu0/QQGZohtbbYANCBlqYOpcb9AMKz1A SlC19NT4N2kICxpJilMKIDUZWpGyYEeW9hHVj24m8cf/5Y7npbyvtpOjua+MqhZQ frb78aPeseDr1HrcCac= =cKpS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/_PXWHvLXJUh7NhdyguwfmM1--