Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "PaweĊ‚ Hajdan
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] suspicious code in gnustep eclasses
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 19:19:18
Message-Id: 4F759251.2090000@gentoo.org
1 This is from gnustep-base.eclass:
2
3 > egnustep_doc() {
4 > if [[ -d ./Documentation ]] ; then
5 > # Check documentation presence
6 > cd "${S}"/Documentation
7 > if [[ -f ./[mM]akefile || -f ./GNUmakefile ]] ; then
8 > emake "${GS_ENV[@]}" all || die "doc make failed"
9 > emake "${GS_ENV[@]}" install || die "doc install failed"
10 > fi
11 > cd ..
12 > fi
13 > }
14
15 Shouldn't those cd calls above rather be pushd/popd? It seems the above
16 assumes that CWD is "${S}" when egnustep_doc is executed, which is
17 probably true, but pushd/popd seems just safer.
18
19 Also, instead of ./Documentation, "${S}/Documentation" could be used.
20
21 This is from gnustep-2.eclass:
22
23 > RDEPEND="${DEPEND}
24 > debug? ( >=sys-devel/gdb-6.0 )"
25
26 Is there some gnustep crash-reporting tool that uses gdb? I think it's
27 reasonable for USE="debug" to influence how things are compiled, but
28 unless gdb is required for something to work, it should be up to the
29 user to install or not install gdb.
30
31 In case something is broken with <gdb-6.0, please consider two points:
32
33 - there is no <gdb-6.0 in the tree now
34 - you could add a blocker on <gdb-6.0 instead, which is not going to
35 disrupt developers because there is no such version in the tree anyway,
36 and we have up-to-date systems

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] suspicious code in gnustep eclasses Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>