| 1 |
Marius Mauch wrote: |
| 2 |
> Two questions: |
| 3 |
> - are there more packages that could benefit from this? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
None that I know of. However, there might be other similar packages |
| 7 |
without a source tarball (slim chance, but quite possible). At first, I |
| 8 |
asked upstream to provide such tarball, but I got refused because |
| 9 |
"SourceForge file release process is far too annoying". |
| 10 |
As a side note, if bitpim wasn't such a fairly popular package, I |
| 11 |
wouldn't even bother with it (personally I don't use it). |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> - is there a particular reason this has to be integrated into the |
| 14 |
> ebuild and should not be handled by an ordinary script? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
There are 2 reasons: |
| 18 |
a) convenience - no need to pass version to the script |
| 19 |
b) maintainability - easy to take over when I will be gone |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
P.S: The name proposed by me isn't exactly right, as Mike already |
| 22 |
remarked on the bug. I suggest to use src_create as function name. |
Archives