Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Thomas Anderson <gentoofan23@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] EAPI 2 Draft
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 16:58:44
Message-Id: 20080906171431.GA5434@spoc.mpa.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] EAPI 2 Draft by Steve Long
1 On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 12:43:12PM +0100, Steve Long wrote:
2 > Christian Faulhammer wrote:
3 >
4 > > Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>:
5 > >> Both approaches are essentially equivalent but it's a little simpler
6 > >> for ebuild writer if they don't have to customize the output file
7 > >> name.
8 > >
9 > > One needs exceptions for all kind of systems, for example I had to
10 > > workaround Trac which adds ?format=raw to a tarball URI. There seems
11 > > to be a solution in Trac as the guys from fedarahosted fixed the two I
12 > > needed (tmpwatch, mlocate). So the -> operator is quite useful and I
13 > > agree with David that the functionality is doubled.
14 > >
15 > Clearly src-uri transformation is useful. Others have given examples of how
16 > it would be useful to an eclass. Irrespective of how the actual transform
17 > is done in the ;sf=tbz2 case, both _are_ valid use-cases.
18
19 Sure they may be valid use cases, but the issue is whether the
20 ;sf=tar.bz2 code is duplicated from '->'. I don't see any reason why you
21 can't use '->' to handle ;sf=tbz2, so they are duplicated. Since '->'
22 can be used in more circumstances(SRC_URI="http://foo.com/2.3/foo.bz2
23 -> ${P}.tar.bz2" comes to mind), we don't need ;sf=tbz2.

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: [RFC] EAPI 2 Draft Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>