On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 10:27 -0700, Dmitry S. Makovey wrote:

> Just as an update - those pointers were really useful and I was able to 
> finalize ebuild after all (see http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106890 
> for finalized version).

I have some questions; see below ...

> However, just to stay on the "purist" side - using "inherit gnustep-2" as 
> suggested in eclasses pulls in some dependancies that are not really needed 
> (like gnustep-gui and some other) which is not very gentoo-like. Is there a 
> plan to produce more modular eclasses to inherit from (I used "inherit 
> gnustep" and "DEPEND=gnustep-base" initially but comments in gnustep class  
> suggest that it's deprecated)?

You can ask one of the GNUstep developers -- why does the gnustep-2
eclass have a dependency for gnustep-back?  Not all GNUstep-based
applications are GUI.

I have other questions/comments about your ebuild, which will help get
it accepted by the Gentoo devs:

* KEYWORDS should be ~x86/~amd64 until it has passed the testing phase,
not x86/amd64

* Use "cp -pr" instead of piping with tar

* Don't hard code the paths for "openapp" and "oolite.app" in your
wrapper script.  If there is a working GNUstep installation, openapp
will be in the PATH, and the app will be found by openapp through
GNUstep.

* Your DEPEND and RDEPEND are really confusing.  Specifically:
- Why are the versions for stuff under x86 in RDEPEND, but not in
DEPEND?  Doesn't amd64 need those minimum versions?
- Also, doesn't amd64 need x11 and gnustep-env?

Typing this now, it looks like mr_bones already made some comments on
bugzilla -- hopefully with that and this you can polish off the ebuild.


Best,

Sourav

-- 
gentoo-gnustep@g.o mailing list