[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

[Samuli Suominen]

Jeremy Olexa (darkside) wrote:
> darkside    09/10/05 21:22:30
> 
>   Modified:             ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild
>   Log:
>   Port Gentoo Prefix ebuild to gentoo-x86
>   (Portage version: 2.1.6.13/cvs/Linux x86_64)
> +		# Prefix compat. In Gentoo Linux, defaults to ${D}
> +		[[ -z ${ED} ]] && local ED=${D}

Shouldn't this be moved into main Portage code instead of duplicating it
in ebuilds?

> +		find "${ED}" -type f -name perllocal.pod -delete
> +		find "${ED}" -depth -mindepth 1 -type d -empty -delete

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

[Tomáš Chvátal]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 884 bytes --]

Dne pondělí 05 Říjen 2009 23:31:03 Samuli Suominen napsal(a):
> Jeremy Olexa (darkside) wrote:
> > darkside    09/10/05 21:22:30
> >
> >   Modified:             ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild
> >   Log:
> >   Port Gentoo Prefix ebuild to gentoo-x86
> >   (Portage version: 2.1.6.13/cvs/Linux x86_64)
> > +		# Prefix compat. In Gentoo Linux, defaults to ${D}
> > +		[[ -z ${ED} ]] && local ED=${D}
> 
> Shouldn't this be moved into main Portage code instead of duplicating it
> in ebuilds?
> 
> > +		find "${ED}" -type f -name perllocal.pod -delete
> > +		find "${ED}" -depth -mindepth 1 -type d -empty -delete
> 
I put this stuff to eclass, but probably this SHOULD be handled by portage:
this is the code i do (partial example :]):

...
# Prefix compat:
: ${EROOT:=${ROOT}}
# Append missing trailing slash character
[[ ${EROOT} = */ ]] || EROOT+="/"
...

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

[Jeremy Olexa]

2009/10/5 Tomáš Chvátal <scarabeus@gentoo.org>:
> Dne pondělí 05 Říjen 2009 23:31:03 Samuli Suominen napsal(a):
>> Jeremy Olexa (darkside) wrote:
>> > darkside    09/10/05 21:22:30
>> >
>> >   Modified:             ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild
>> >   Log:
>> >   Port Gentoo Prefix ebuild to gentoo-x86
>> >   (Portage version: 2.1.6.13/cvs/Linux x86_64)
>> > +           # Prefix compat. In Gentoo Linux, defaults to ${D}
>> > +           [[ -z ${ED} ]] && local ED=${D}
>>
>> Shouldn't this be moved into main Portage code instead of duplicating it
>> in ebuilds?

Hi, yes it should. It was brought up during the EAPI=3 planning cycle
and presented to the council for inclusion. It wasn't accepted in that
EAPI even though it is only a 3 line portage change (approx). So, it
will be duplicated in ebuilds and eclasses. Now, with this email I
fully expect a reply from /someone/ saying that "the Gentoo Prefix
implementation is just plain wrong" to which, I am going to silently
ignore.
-Jeremy

>>
>> > +           find "${ED}" -type f -name perllocal.pod -delete
>> > +           find "${ED}" -depth -mindepth 1 -type d -empty -delete
>>
> I put this stuff to eclass, but probably this SHOULD be handled by portage:
> this is the code i do (partial example :]):
>
> ...
> # Prefix compat:
> : ${EROOT:=${ROOT}}
> # Append missing trailing slash character
> [[ ${EROOT} = */ ]] || EROOT+="/"

Good idea, and public thanks for supporting Gentoo Prefix, Tomáš

-Jeremy

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

[Nirbheek Chauhan]

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:19 AM, Jeremy Olexa <darkside@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Now, with this email I
> fully expect a reply from /someone/ saying that "the Gentoo Prefix
> implementation is just plain wrong" to which, I am going to silently
> ignore.

Good plan. As they say, don't feed the trolls. No matter how highly
evolved they may (seem to) be.

-- 
~Nirbheek Chauhan

GNOME+Mozilla Team, Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 668 bytes --]

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:49:54 -0500
Jeremy Olexa <darkside@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Now, with this email I fully expect a reply from /someone/ saying
> that "the Gentoo Prefix implementation is just plain wrong" to which,
> I am going to silently ignore.

No, everyone already knows what you're doing wrong, yourself included,
so I doubt you'll see anyone bothering to bring that up -- it hasn't
made any difference for the past four years, so why would that change
now? You probably will see some remarks about "commit it, and let
everyone else deal with the mess for years to come" being the
long-established Gentoo tradition, however.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

[David Leverton]

On Monday 05 October 2009 23:20:10 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> You probably will see some remarks about "commit it, and let
> everyone else deal with the mess for years to come" being the
> long-established Gentoo tradition, however.

Not to mention "accuse anyone who disagrees with you of being a troll".

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

[Samuli Suominen]

David Leverton wrote:
> On Monday 05 October 2009 23:20:10 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> You probably will see some remarks about "commit it, and let
>> everyone else deal with the mess for years to come" being the
>> long-established Gentoo tradition, however.
> 
> Not to mention "accuse anyone who disagrees with you of being a troll".

Full stop. If you don't have anything productive to add, please stay quiet.