| 1 |
On Monday, May 30, 2011 9:30:02 AM UTC+3, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Right now, a quick 'grep -l github.*tarball' shows that there are about |
| 4 |
> 147 ebuilds in portage using github snapshots. This evaluates to 83 |
| 5 |
> different packages. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> The problem with github is that it suffixes the tarballs with |
| 8 |
> a complete git commit id. This means that the `S' variable |
| 9 |
> in the ebuild needs to refer to a long hash changing randomly. Right |
| 10 |
> now, the problem is handled in a number of ways: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> 1) (from app-admin/rudy) |
| 13 |
> 2) (app-emacs/calfw and suggested solution for Sunrise) |
| 14 |
> 3) (app-misc/bgrep) |
| 15 |
> 4) (app-misc/tmux-mem-cpu-load) |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> What I'd like to do is creating a small github.eclass, encapsulating |
| 18 |
> a common, nice way of handling the S issue. I guess the best solution |
| 19 |
> would be to git with something like 2) above, with the eclass providing |
| 20 |
> github_src_unpack() for EAPIs 2+. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
What is the current situation with this one? Every once in a while I run into a github ebuild I need to create and I am not really sure what to do with it. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Right now 2) seems like the safest approach. But did anything get into EAPI? |
Archives