[gentoo-dev] About validate_desktop_entries in eutils.eclass

[gentoo-dev] About validate_desktop_entries in eutils.eclass

[Pacho Ramos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 364 bytes --]

Hello

I am unsure about validate_desktop_entries() utility. It's currently
provided by eutils.eclass and only called by net-firewall/fwbuilder.
Shouldn't this be moved to a "qa" check? Current way is pretty useless
as it's not used by most of packages, and calling it from a lot of
eclasses/ebuilds doesn't sound me like a good idea.

What do you think?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] About validate_desktop_entries in eutils.eclass

[Samuli Suominen]

On 04/15/2012 12:59 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Hello
>
> I am unsure about validate_desktop_entries() utility. It's currently
> provided by eutils.eclass and only called by net-firewall/fwbuilder.

and xfconf.eclass :)

> Shouldn't this be moved to a "qa" check? Current way is pretty useless
> as it's not used by most of packages, and calling it from a lot of
> eclasses/ebuilds doesn't sound me like a good idea.
>
> What do you think?

+1 for making it more easily available

Re: [gentoo-dev] About validate_desktop_entries in eutils.eclass

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 520 bytes --]

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:59:50 +0200
Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I am unsure about validate_desktop_entries() utility. It's currently
> provided by eutils.eclass and only called by net-firewall/fwbuilder.
> Shouldn't this be moved to a "qa" check? Current way is pretty useless
> as it's not used by most of packages, and calling it from a lot of
> eclasses/ebuilds doesn't sound me like a good idea.
> 
> What do you think?

Agreed. It should be in repoman.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 316 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] About validate_desktop_entries in eutils.eclass

[Pacho Ramos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 782 bytes --]

El dom, 15-04-2012 a las 16:02 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:59:50 +0200
> Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > I am unsure about validate_desktop_entries() utility. It's currently
> > provided by eutils.eclass and only called by net-firewall/fwbuilder.
> > Shouldn't this be moved to a "qa" check? Current way is pretty useless
> > as it's not used by most of packages, and calling it from a lot of
> > eclasses/ebuilds doesn't sound me like a good idea.
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> Agreed. It should be in repoman.
> 

The check needs to be run over desktop file going to be installed, not
sure how repoman can handle it, it looked to me more like a emerge job
(like is done with other qa checks run before installation)

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] About validate_desktop_entries in eutils.eclass

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1028 bytes --]

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 16:12:11 +0200
Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:

> El dom, 15-04-2012 a las 16:02 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
> > On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:59:50 +0200
> > Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > I am unsure about validate_desktop_entries() utility. It's
> > > currently provided by eutils.eclass and only called by
> > > net-firewall/fwbuilder. Shouldn't this be moved to a "qa" check?
> > > Current way is pretty useless as it's not used by most of
> > > packages, and calling it from a lot of eclasses/ebuilds doesn't
> > > sound me like a good idea.
> > > 
> > > What do you think?
> > 
> > Agreed. It should be in repoman.
> > 
> 
> The check needs to be run over desktop file going to be installed, not
> sure how repoman can handle it, it looked to me more like a emerge job
> (like is done with other qa checks run before installation)

Tfu, you're right. It should be in *however portage calls it runtime QA
thingy* :P.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 316 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] About validate_desktop_entries in eutils.eclass

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1024 bytes --]

On 15.04.2012 17:12, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El dom, 15-04-2012 a las 16:02 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:59:50 +0200
>> Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I am unsure about validate_desktop_entries() utility. It's currently
>>> provided by eutils.eclass and only called by net-firewall/fwbuilder.
>>> Shouldn't this be moved to a "qa" check? Current way is pretty useless
>>> as it's not used by most of packages, and calling it from a lot of
>>> eclasses/ebuilds doesn't sound me like a good idea.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>
>> Agreed. It should be in repoman.
>>
> 
> The check needs to be run over desktop file going to be installed, not
> sure how repoman can handle it, it looked to me more like a emerge job
> (like is done with other qa checks run before installation)

There's actually already code in repoman that runs
desktop-file-validate. It of course only works for installed packages.
Someone could make it run runtime too.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 900 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] About validate_desktop_entries in eutils.eclass

[Zac Medico]

On 04/29/2012 09:45 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 15.04.2012 17:12, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>> El dom, 15-04-2012 a las 16:02 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:59:50 +0200
>>> Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am unsure about validate_desktop_entries() utility. It's currently
>>>> provided by eutils.eclass and only called by net-firewall/fwbuilder.
>>>> Shouldn't this be moved to a "qa" check? Current way is pretty useless
>>>> as it's not used by most of packages, and calling it from a lot of
>>>> eclasses/ebuilds doesn't sound me like a good idea.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Agreed. It should be in repoman.
>>>
>>
>> The check needs to be run over desktop file going to be installed, not
>> sure how repoman can handle it, it looked to me more like a emerge job
>> (like is done with other qa checks run before installation)
> 
> There's actually already code in repoman that runs
> desktop-file-validate. It of course only works for installed packages.
> Someone could make it run runtime too.

The repoman code works on $FILESDIR. It looks like we also want to run
it after src_install.

Also, it looks like we might need to handle a special case for Konqueror
Service Menus:

  https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414125
-- 
Thanks,
Zac

Re: [gentoo-dev] About validate_desktop_entries in eutils.eclass

[Pacho Ramos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1530 bytes --]

El lun, 30-04-2012 a las 10:05 -0700, Zac Medico escribió:
> On 04/29/2012 09:45 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > On 15.04.2012 17:12, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >> El dom, 15-04-2012 a las 16:02 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
> >>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:59:50 +0200
> >>> Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I am unsure about validate_desktop_entries() utility. It's currently
> >>>> provided by eutils.eclass and only called by net-firewall/fwbuilder.
> >>>> Shouldn't this be moved to a "qa" check? Current way is pretty useless
> >>>> as it's not used by most of packages, and calling it from a lot of
> >>>> eclasses/ebuilds doesn't sound me like a good idea.
> >>>>
> >>>> What do you think?
> >>>
> >>> Agreed. It should be in repoman.
> >>>
> >>
> >> The check needs to be run over desktop file going to be installed, not
> >> sure how repoman can handle it, it looked to me more like a emerge job
> >> (like is done with other qa checks run before installation)
> > 
> > There's actually already code in repoman that runs
> > desktop-file-validate. It of course only works for installed packages.
> > Someone could make it run runtime too.
> 
> The repoman code works on $FILESDIR. It looks like we also want to run
> it after src_install.
> 
> Also, it looks like we might need to handle a special case for Konqueror
> Service Menus:
> 
>   https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414125

Yes, I would like to also check other desktop files than those coming
from FILESDIR


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