1 |
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:47:41 +0100 |
2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:36:00 +0800 |
5 |
> Ben <yngwin@×××××.com> wrote: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> > On 12 March 2012 02:27, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
8 |
> > > On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 10:25:38 -0700 (PDT) |
9 |
> > > Leho Kraav <leho@×××××.com> wrote: |
10 |
> > > |
11 |
> > >> On Monday, May 30, 2011 9:30:02 AM UTC+3, Michał Górny wrote: |
12 |
> > >> > |
13 |
> > >> > Right now, a quick 'grep -l github.*tarball' shows that there |
14 |
> > >> > are about 147 ebuilds in portage using github snapshots. This |
15 |
> > >> > evaluates to 83 different packages. |
16 |
> > >> > |
17 |
> > >> > The problem with github is that it suffixes the tarballs with |
18 |
> > >> > a complete git commit id. This means that the `S' variable |
19 |
> > >> > in the ebuild needs to refer to a long hash changing randomly. |
20 |
> > >> > Right now, the problem is handled in a number of ways: |
21 |
> > >> > |
22 |
> > >> > 1) (from app-admin/rudy) |
23 |
> > >> > 2) (app-emacs/calfw and suggested solution for Sunrise) |
24 |
> > >> > 3) (app-misc/bgrep) |
25 |
> > >> > 4) (app-misc/tmux-mem-cpu-load) |
26 |
> > >> > |
27 |
> > >> > What I'd like to do is creating a small github.eclass, |
28 |
> > >> > encapsulating a common, nice way of handling the S issue. I |
29 |
> > >> > guess the best solution would be to git with something like 2) |
30 |
> > >> > above, with the eclass providing github_src_unpack() for EAPIs |
31 |
> > >> > 2+. |
32 |
> > >> |
33 |
> > >> What is the current situation with this one? Every once in a |
34 |
> > >> while I run into a github ebuild I need to create and I am not |
35 |
> > >> really sure what to do with it. |
36 |
> > >> |
37 |
> > >> Right now 2) seems like the safest approach. But did anything get |
38 |
> > >> into EAPI? |
39 |
> > > |
40 |
> > > You mean eclass? I submitted one for review but didn't get much of |
41 |
> > > positive feedback on it. I'll commit it anyway soon, just let me |
42 |
> > > double check and do some testing. |
43 |
> > |
44 |
> > +1 from me. I think it would be useful to have a standard way of |
45 |
> > handling this. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> Attaching my current conceptual eclass. I've tested it with github, |
48 |
> gitweb and bitbucket. It won't work with gitorious but their snapshot |
49 |
> download mechanism is broken anyway (they like to submit 'try again |
50 |
> later' in plaintext). |
51 |
|
52 |
Committed. |
53 |
|
54 |
-- |
55 |
Best regards, |
56 |
Michał Górny |