Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] suspicious code in gnustep eclasses
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 06:46:09
Message-Id: 20120331064523.GW10282@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] suspicious code in gnustep eclasses by "Paweł Hajdan
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

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies