1 |
On 30-03-2012 13:00:33 +0200, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: |
2 |
> This is from gnustep-base.eclass: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > egnustep_doc() { |
5 |
> > if [[ -d ./Documentation ]] ; then |
6 |
> > # Check documentation presence |
7 |
> > cd "${S}"/Documentation |
8 |
> > if [[ -f ./[mM]akefile || -f ./GNUmakefile ]] ; then |
9 |
> > emake "${GS_ENV[@]}" all || die "doc make failed" |
10 |
> > emake "${GS_ENV[@]}" install || die "doc install failed" |
11 |
> > fi |
12 |
> > cd .. |
13 |
> > fi |
14 |
> > } |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Shouldn't those cd calls above rather be pushd/popd? It seems the above |
17 |
> assumes that CWD is "${S}" when egnustep_doc is executed, which is |
18 |
> probably true, but pushd/popd seems just safer. |
19 |
|
20 |
Go ahead. |
21 |
|
22 |
> Also, instead of ./Documentation, "${S}/Documentation" could be used. |
23 |
|
24 |
Given the following cd, I tend to agree. |
25 |
|
26 |
> This is from gnustep-2.eclass: |
27 |
> |
28 |
> > RDEPEND="${DEPEND} |
29 |
> > debug? ( >=sys-devel/gdb-6.0 )" |
30 |
> |
31 |
> Is there some gnustep crash-reporting tool that uses gdb? I think it's |
32 |
> reasonable for USE="debug" to influence how things are compiled, but |
33 |
> unless gdb is required for something to work, it should be up to the |
34 |
> user to install or not install gdb. |
35 |
> |
36 |
> In case something is broken with <gdb-6.0, please consider two points: |
37 |
> |
38 |
> - there is no <gdb-6.0 in the tree now |
39 |
> - you could add a blocker on <gdb-6.0 instead, which is not going to |
40 |
> disrupt developers because there is no such version in the tree anyway, |
41 |
> and we have up-to-date systems |
42 |
|
43 |
I think the version is because GNUstep is written in Objective-C. That |
44 |
said, I think your blocker approach would be fine. |
45 |
|
46 |
|
47 |
-- |
48 |
Fabian Groffen |
49 |
Gentoo on a different level |