[gentoo-dev] Annoying X.Org tarball naming (and how to deal with it)

[gentoo-dev] Annoying X.Org tarball naming (and how to deal with it)

[Donnie Berkholz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I'd appreciate some ideas better than what I've come up with so far to
deal with the very strange X.Org release naming.

When modular tarballs are part of a full X.Org release (7.0, 7.1, etc),
then they are named PN-PV-XORG_RELEASE.tar.(gz|bz2) and S matches. When
modular tarballs are independently released outside a full X.Org
release, they are named the standard way -- PN-PV.tar.(gz|bz2), same for S.

Dealing with this all in an automated fashion in x-modular.eclass is
somewhat difficult, and here's what I've come up with:

A variable (XORG_PV), set by the ebuild, to tell _which_ release it's
part of when it is part of a full release. If it's set, that means (1)
it is part of a full release and (2) indicates which release it's part of.

What does this mean for the future? All modular X ebuilds that are part
of a full release will require XORG_PV to be set. All modular X ebuilds
that aren't part of a full release will not require anything new. I'm
doing it this way because I expect there to be more packages that aren't
part of a full release than ones that are.

Please give me your input on this.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDqjr2XVaO67S1rtsRAhlPAKCMvjj82U6sNPpVYsUOnKOsRwAF4QCgibKM
Ccs1TnSQbXI66BVpf4P8Ed4=
=NFr1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Annoying X.Org tarball naming (and how to deal with it)

[Ferris McCormick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1726 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 21:34 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> I'd appreciate some ideas better than what I've come up with so far to
> deal with the very strange X.Org release naming.
> 
> When modular tarballs are part of a full X.Org release (7.0, 7.1, etc),
> then they are named PN-PV-XORG_RELEASE.tar.(gz|bz2) and S matches. When
> modular tarballs are independently released outside a full X.Org
> release, they are named the standard way -- PN-PV.tar.(gz|bz2), same for S.
> 
> Dealing with this all in an automated fashion in x-modular.eclass is
> somewhat difficult, and here's what I've come up with:
> 
> A variable (XORG_PV), set by the ebuild, to tell _which_ release it's
> part of when it is part of a full release. If it's set, that means (1)
> it is part of a full release and (2) indicates which release it's part of.
> 
> What does this mean for the future? All modular X ebuilds that are part
> of a full release will require XORG_PV to be set. All modular X ebuilds
> that aren't part of a full release will not require anything new. I'm
> doing it this way because I expect there to be more packages that aren't
> part of a full release than ones that are.
> 
> Please give me your input on this.

Seems fine to me.  I hope you are right in your assumption about
packages in full releases.

> 
> Thanks,
> Donnie
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQFDqjr2XVaO67S1rtsRAhlPAKCMvjj82U6sNPpVYsUOnKOsRwAF4QCgibKM
> Ccs1TnSQbXI66BVpf4P8Ed4=
> =NFr1
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@gentoo.org>
Developer, Gentoo Linux (Sparc, Devrel)

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Annoying X.Org tarball naming (and how to deal with it)

[Donnie Berkholz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ferris McCormick wrote:
| On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 21:34 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
| What does this mean for the future? All modular X ebuilds that are part
| of a full release will require XORG_PV to be set. All modular X ebuilds
| that aren't part of a full release will not require anything new. I'm
| doing it this way because I expect there to be more packages that aren't
| part of a full release than ones that are.
|
| Please give me your input on this.
|
|
|> Seems fine to me.  I hope you are right in your assumption about
|> packages in full releases.

Even if I'm wrong, it's a matter of setting a single variable, and it
will always have to be set for all non-7.0 releases either way (assuming
~ I'd default to 7.0) so they know which release they're part of.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDqsULXVaO67S1rtsRAo67AKCJ3f5HARANAoYdmKmD50aBMRZowgCeLggq
6Bab1dfkAH7OhpxleZiYZIQ=
=88ec
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Annoying X.Org tarball naming (and how to deal with it)

[Donnie Berkholz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
| I'd appreciate some ideas better than what I've come up with so far to
| deal with the very strange X.Org release naming.
|
| When modular tarballs are part of a full X.Org release (7.0, 7.1, etc),
| then they are named PN-PV-XORG_RELEASE.tar.(gz|bz2) and S matches. When
| modular tarballs are independently released outside a full X.Org
| release, they are named the standard way -- PN-PV.tar.(gz|bz2), same
for S.

Through working with upstream and other distributors, we've come to the
conclusion that having upstream provide both versioned and unversioned
tarballs is the best solution and avoids this issue entirely.

Take-home point: When upstream does annoying crap, talk to them about
it. And when they disagree, find some friends and talk to them again.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDq3XGXVaO67S1rtsRAtDPAJ0dfkHjlHM7HXm4+yriap0Va7LLOQCfVQOF
EBuHuJq5oF+TvRyfemchAkg=
=+bQu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list