| 1 |
On 30/10/12 22:18, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 17:08:07 -0300 |
| 3 |
> Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 21:57:11 +0200 |
| 6 |
>> Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>>> On 30/10/12 21:56, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 9 |
>>>> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 19:08:39 +0000 (UTC) |
| 10 |
>>>> "Samuli Suominen (ssuominen)" <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 11 |
>>>> |
| 12 |
>>>> [...] |
| 13 |
>>>>> |
| 14 |
>>>>> case ${EAPI:-0} in |
| 15 |
>>>>> 0|1|2|3|4) ;; |
| 16 |
>>>>> *) die "${ECLASS}.eclass API in EAPI ${EAPI} not yet |
| 17 |
>>>>> established." esac |
| 18 |
>>>> |
| 19 |
>>>> sounds like a useless and annoying check for just exporting one |
| 20 |
>>>> function |
| 21 |
>>>> |
| 22 |
>>>>> |
| 23 |
>>>>> RDEPEND="" |
| 24 |
>>>> |
| 25 |
>>>> useless? |
| 26 |
>>> |
| 27 |
>>> if the ebuild is EAPI=0 or EAPI=1 then DEPEND expands to RDEPEND, so |
| 28 |
>>> setting empty RDEPEND prevents that, or am I missing something? |
| 29 |
>> |
| 30 |
>> even with eclasses and inheritence ? maybe you're right but i wouldnt |
| 31 |
>> bet anything |
| 32 |
>> |
| 33 |
>>> |
| 34 |
>>>> |
| 35 |
>>>>> DEPEND="virtual/pkgconfig" |
| 36 |
>>>>> |
| 37 |
>>>>> # @FUNCTION: _udev_get_udevdir |
| 38 |
>>>>> # @INTERNAL |
| 39 |
>>>>> # @DESCRIPTION: |
| 40 |
>>>>> # Get unprefixed udevdir. |
| 41 |
>>>>> _udev_get_udevdir() { |
| 42 |
>>>>> if $($(tc-getPKG_CONFIG) --exists udev); then |
| 43 |
>>>>> echo -n "$($(tc-getPKG_CONFIG) --variable=udevdir |
| 44 |
>>>>> udev)" else |
| 45 |
>>>>> echo -n /lib/udev |
| 46 |
>>>>> fi |
| 47 |
>>>>> } |
| 48 |
>>>>> |
| 49 |
>>>>> # @FUNCTION: udev_get_udevdir |
| 50 |
>>>>> # @DESCRIPTION: |
| 51 |
>>>>> # Output the path for the udev directory (not including ${D}). |
| 52 |
>>>>> # This function always succeeds, even if udev is not installed. |
| 53 |
>>>>> # The fallback value is set to /lib/udev |
| 54 |
>>>>> udev_get_udevdir() { |
| 55 |
>>>>> has "${EAPI:-0}" 0 1 2 && ! use prefix && EPREFIX= |
| 56 |
>>>>> debug-print-function ${FUNCNAME} "${@}" |
| 57 |
>>>>> |
| 58 |
>>>>> echo -n "${EPREFIX}$(_udev_get_udevdir)" |
| 59 |
>>>>> } |
| 60 |
>>>> |
| 61 |
>>>> local foo="" |
| 62 |
>>>> unfold _udev_get_udevdir there, replacing 'echo -n' by foo= |
| 63 |
>>>> printf ...$foo |
| 64 |
>>>> |
| 65 |
>>>> kill the extra internal fucntion that seems useless. |
| 66 |
>>>> echo isn't really reliable for precise formatting, prefer printf |
| 67 |
>>>> when it matters. (in this case it doesn't matter but seems good |
| 68 |
>>>> practices) |
| 69 |
>>>> |
| 70 |
>>>> have you checked what is the udevdir value on prefix, if at all |
| 71 |
>>>> relevant ? I fear a double prefix issue. |
| 72 |
>>>> |
| 73 |
>>> |
| 74 |
>>> the code is more or less same as systemd.eclass has, I don't want to |
| 75 |
>>> diverge too much from that since we are essentially dealing with the |
| 76 |
>>> same package (tarball) |
| 77 |
>> |
| 78 |
>> well, two bad do not make a good |
| 79 |
>> consider the above remarks to apply to systemd.eclass too then, and |
| 80 |
>> either explain why they're not relevant or apply them to both eclasses |
| 81 |
>> if you want to avoid divergence. |
| 82 |
> |
| 83 |
> Don't even try to touch any of my eclasses without prior asking. |
| 84 |
> |
| 85 |
> And the additional internal function there was used in order to get |
| 86 |
> unprefixed path for do*() and new*() functions. |
| 87 |
> |
| 88 |
|
| 89 |
same as i'll propably reuse the function for something like |
| 90 |
$(do_udev_rules) later on |
| 91 |
|
| 92 |
the udev.eclass might have one function now, but that's just a |
| 93 |
rudementary start to drop most of the duplication from ebuilds |
Archives