Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Dan Naumov <jago@×××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Very bad ebuild-writing practice.
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 13:28:21
Message-Id: 20020817213236.40ae8232.jago@telefragged.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Very bad ebuild-writing practice. by mike
1 On Sat, 17 Aug 2002 14:12:54 -0400
2 "mike" <vapier@×××××××.com> wrote:
3
4 > this was a known issue when the ebuild made (i made it ;])
5 > but the solution was to grab a stable-ish build, make the digest
6 > off of it, and post it to ibiblio. then, when the next stable-ish
7 > version came along, a new digest would be put out and the
8 > version be bumped up to -r1 and so on and so forth. the
9 > problem lays with the fact that the last release of quakeforge
10 > is like 0.3.0. this version is dead and majorly obsolete.
11 > the 'newer' versions get put out when someone famil with
12 > the project feels it is needed. also, that tar ball isnt auto-generated
13 > every single hour ... not sure if it is even autogenerated ...
14 > but yeah, i think the version should have had at least a
15 > date tag on it now that you mention it. once i fix the
16 > ebuild for gcc3.x ill post the new one with a date tag
17 > -mike
18
19 The 0.5.x CVS snapshots to which the ebuild links ARE automatically generated every hour. Ask on OPN #QuakeForge if you don't trust me.
20
21 Dan Naumov aka Jago