From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13B40158074 for ; Sun, 29 Jun 2025 12:35:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gentoo.org (bobolink.gentoo.org [140.211.166.189]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: relay-lists.gentoo.org@gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 01B18341E6A for ; Sun, 29 Jun 2025 12:35:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bobolink.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bobolink.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3224110564; Sun, 29 Jun 2025 12:34:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.io (ciao.gmane.io [116.202.254.214]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange secp256r1 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by bobolink.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4D0711055B for ; Sun, 29 Jun 2025 12:34:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1uVrF3-0000MV-TF for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 29 Jun 2025 14:34:41 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] skel.ebuild: update SRC_URI Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2025 12:34:37 -0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20250628105918.341941-1-kangie@gentoo.org> 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Pan/0.163 (Kryvyi Rih) X-Archives-Salt: 0a2ee2d7-6797-454d-848a-8607b15cade6 X-Archives-Hash: edd69e2d68f34ef8ce44b54eecf37d68 kangie posted on Sat, 28 Jun 2025 20:49:29 +1000 as excerpted: > In 2025 FTP is increasingly uncommon. The world we live in is (mostly) > HTTPS, and SRC_URI should reflect that. ++ > Add additional commentry about (and use SRC_URI to show an example of) > renaming the distfile with `->` when required. > # Point to any required sources; these will be automatically downloaded by > -# Portage. > -SRC_URI="ftp://foo.example.org/${P}.tar.gz" > +# Portage. If a file needs to be renamed, use the "->" syntax. > +SRC_URI="https://files.example.org/foo/v${PV}.tar.xz -> ${P}.tar.xz" So I suppose I'm as portage-positive as the next guy, but... Maybe take the opportunity to s/Portage/package manager/ (mangler?) or some such while you're at it? (Or maybe "EAPI compliant package manager" if just PM's too generic, or just PM if it's not considered to ambiguous...) Just seems a bit like tunnel vision to specifically name portage in something like skel.ebuild these days, even if portage /is/ the vast majority, user-side. (Of course doesn't /have/ to be /this/ commit if someone thinks that needs more discussion than the simple s/ftp/https/ stuff or maybe council needs to vote on a change like that... but the discussion would need to start somewhere even if it won't go in this commit, so...) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman