Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: hasufell@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: vcs-snapshot-r1.eclass -- a better eclass for VCS snapshots (and others)
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 14:24:40
Message-Id: 20120608162451.514e3238@pomiocik.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: vcs-snapshot-r1.eclass -- a better eclass for VCS snapshots (and others) by hasufell
1 On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 16:06:27 +0200
2 hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
5 > Hash: SHA1
6 >
7 > On 06/08/2012 03:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
8 > > On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 15:34:32 +0200 Is there a need for that?
9 >
10 > I don't know, do you?
11
12 Estimated to three packages, two in gx86, one in betagarden. All
13 of them grabbing zipballs from github, so can be easily changed to
14 download tarballs instead.
15
16 Do you see a reason why they should use zipballs which are larger
17 and require adding unzip to DEPEND rather than tarballs? The only
18 reason for that I can see is that they copy-pasted the 'download' URI
19 from somewhere where author posted only zipball link.
20
21 > This reduces the amount of archives the eclass can handle. Unless
22 > gentoo decides to drop zip support I don't see a reason to do that in
23 > an eclass too just for the sake of code-style.
24
25 It's for a sake of code & work amount. And zip support in Gentoo is not
26 obligatory. You need to add unzip to your DEPEND yourself.
27
28 > My previous implementation had no trouble with zipballs. So if you
29 > suggest a new implementation I would expect that to be better.
30
31 Your previous implementation was against the KISS principle.
32
33 --
34 Best regards,
35 Michał Górny

Attachments

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

Replies