| 1 |
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 04:32:32AM +0200, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: |
| 2 |
> Sure, spliting that will produce a bit of code duplication. It's |
| 3 |
> a bit less readable imho, but that's really just a cosmetic |
| 4 |
> issue: |
| 5 |
> ==================================================== |
| 6 |
> src_configure() { |
| 7 |
> econf || die |
| 8 |
> if use foo ; then |
| 9 |
> cd "${S}/foo-plugin" |
| 10 |
> econf || die |
| 11 |
> fi |
| 12 |
> } |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> src_compile() { |
| 15 |
> emake || die |
| 16 |
> if use foo ; then |
| 17 |
> cd "${S}/foo-plugin" |
| 18 |
> emake || die |
| 19 |
> fi |
| 20 |
> } |
| 21 |
> ==================================================== |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> I've also searched for some more problematic ebuilds, like some |
| 27 |
> which would configure & build the same source several times |
| 28 |
> (x11-libs/wxGTK maybe, also i'm not really sure) or some which |
| 29 |
> would first configure and build a libfoo/ subtree, and then |
| 30 |
> configure and build the main program (did not found any of that |
| 31 |
> kind, but i would not be surprised some exists). |
| 32 |
I know know stuff that NEEDS this: |
| 33 |
cd $S |
| 34 |
econf && emake || die |
| 35 |
cd $S/plugin/$foo |
| 36 |
econf && emake || die |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
and the stuff in $bar/plugin/$foo REQUIRES that $S be built first. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
But as a possible fix for this, we could break out the plugin to a new |
| 41 |
package. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
| 45 |
E-Mail : robbat2@××××××××××××××.net |
| 46 |
Home Page : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2 |
| 47 |
ICQ# : 30269588 or 41961639 |
| 48 |
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 |
Archives