1 |
On 30/10/12 21:56, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 19:08:39 +0000 (UTC) |
3 |
> "Samuli Suominen (ssuominen)" <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> [...] |
6 |
>> |
7 |
>> case ${EAPI:-0} in |
8 |
>> 0|1|2|3|4) ;; |
9 |
>> *) die "${ECLASS}.eclass API in EAPI ${EAPI} not yet |
10 |
>> established." esac |
11 |
> |
12 |
> sounds like a useless and annoying check for just exporting one function |
13 |
> |
14 |
>> |
15 |
>> RDEPEND="" |
16 |
> |
17 |
> useless? |
18 |
|
19 |
if the ebuild is EAPI=0 or EAPI=1 then DEPEND expands to RDEPEND, so |
20 |
setting empty RDEPEND prevents that, or am I missing something? |
21 |
|
22 |
> |
23 |
>> DEPEND="virtual/pkgconfig" |
24 |
>> |
25 |
>> # @FUNCTION: _udev_get_udevdir |
26 |
>> # @INTERNAL |
27 |
>> # @DESCRIPTION: |
28 |
>> # Get unprefixed udevdir. |
29 |
>> _udev_get_udevdir() { |
30 |
>> if $($(tc-getPKG_CONFIG) --exists udev); then |
31 |
>> echo -n "$($(tc-getPKG_CONFIG) --variable=udevdir |
32 |
>> udev)" else |
33 |
>> echo -n /lib/udev |
34 |
>> fi |
35 |
>> } |
36 |
>> |
37 |
>> # @FUNCTION: udev_get_udevdir |
38 |
>> # @DESCRIPTION: |
39 |
>> # Output the path for the udev directory (not including ${D}). |
40 |
>> # This function always succeeds, even if udev is not installed. |
41 |
>> # The fallback value is set to /lib/udev |
42 |
>> udev_get_udevdir() { |
43 |
>> has "${EAPI:-0}" 0 1 2 && ! use prefix && EPREFIX= |
44 |
>> debug-print-function ${FUNCNAME} "${@}" |
45 |
>> |
46 |
>> echo -n "${EPREFIX}$(_udev_get_udevdir)" |
47 |
>> } |
48 |
> |
49 |
> local foo="" |
50 |
> unfold _udev_get_udevdir there, replacing 'echo -n' by foo= |
51 |
> printf ...$foo |
52 |
> |
53 |
> kill the extra internal fucntion that seems useless. |
54 |
> echo isn't really reliable for precise formatting, prefer printf when |
55 |
> it matters. (in this case it doesn't matter but seems good practices) |
56 |
> |
57 |
> have you checked what is the udevdir value on prefix, if at all |
58 |
> relevant ? I fear a double prefix issue. |
59 |
> |
60 |
|
61 |
the code is more or less same as systemd.eclass has, I don't want to |
62 |
diverge too much from that since we are essentially dealing with the |
63 |
same package (tarball) |