Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuilds for packages without a homepage?
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:54:06
Message-Id: 20051025195126.GA14893@nightcrawler
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuilds for packages without a homepage? by "Spider (D.m.D. Lj.)"
1 On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:36:02PM +0200, Spider (D.m.D. Lj.) wrote:
2 > On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 20:22 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
3 > > On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:35:20 +0200 Krzysiek Pawlik
4 > > <nelchael@g.o> wrote:
5 > > | Marco Morales wrote:
6 > > | > I think "none" could be the better workaround imho.
7 > > |
8 > > | I vote for "none" too :) It clearly states, that HOMEPAGE is missing.
9 > > | Blank HOMEPAGE is misleading.
10 > >
11 > > Then any automated tools will need to be told explicitly that "none" is
12 > > something special. With all HOMEPAGE entries being fully qualified URIs,
13 > > you can just do something like for h in HOMEPAGE ; do firefox "$h" & ;
14 > > done , which works just fine in multiple and blank homepage cases...
15 >
16 >
17 > I agree with Ciaran here. exporting the explicitly empty variable is a
18 > good thing. If, however the variable is unset completely, then we have
19 > an issue of laziness on a developers part.
20 Why?
21
22 portage substitutes "" when metadata keys are unset during depends
23 export. Seems kind of pointless requiring an empty var- yes it could
24 be used for typo checks where the dev does a
25
26 HOMEPAGe="blah"
27
28 but no other var has an actual check of that sort- to do the check
29 would require mangling ebuild.sh also, which I think is kind of daft.
30
31 Repoman complains if the var is unset/empty, works for me personally.
32 ~harring

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuilds for packages without a homepage? Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@g.o>