Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Tomáš Chvátal" <scarabeus@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-sound/cdparanoia: ChangeLog cdparanoia-3.10.2-r3.ebuild
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 14:02:33
Message-Id: CA+NrkpdiR7nJxOfV4UWR1m8zB6T9ihfgzr_eGf2KxdSYUqpGtA@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-sound/cdparanoia: ChangeLog cdparanoia-3.10.2-r3.ebuild by Samuli Suominen
1 2011/10/23 Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o>:
2 > On 10/23/2011 04:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
3 >> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote:
4 >>> On 10/23/2011 03:00 PM, Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
5 >>>> scarabeus    11/10/23 12:00:55
6 >>>>
7 >>>>   Modified:             ChangeLog cdparanoia-3.10.2-r3.ebuild
8 >>>>   Log:
9 >>>>   Bump to eapi4 and punt static libs.
10 >>>
11 >>> Time to revert this commit as I don't see anything in the ebuild that
12 >>> disables building the static archives at compile phase.
13 >>>
14 >>> This is same as hiding the problem, not solving it. Not the way we do
15 >>> things at sound@.
16 >>>
17 >>>> +     use static-libs || find "${ED}" -name '*.a' -exec rm -f {} +
18 >>
19 >> Doesn't reverting this seem a bit like shooting yourself in the foot
20 >> to remove an ingrown toenail?
21 >>
22 >> Unless I'm missing something this DOES get rid of the unneeded
23 >> archives.  Now, sure, you'd save a few milliseconds of CPU if they
24 >> weren't built in the first place.  However, you're proposing replacing
25 >> an ebuild that builds but doesn't install undesired files with one
26 >> that builds them AND installs them (since the hypothetical ebuild that
27 >> does neither doesn't exist yet).
28 >>
29 >> Perfection shouldn't hold us back from improvement.  By all means open
30 >> up a bug asking for the next level of improvement if it really bothers
31 >> people.
32 >>
33 >> Now, if there is some subtle issue that causes issues during build if
34 >> the files are there and only removed at the last minute then clearly
35 >> that is a bigger problem.
36 >
37 > If you only wanted to remove these files, you are free to use
38 > INSTALL_MASK locally instead of downgrading the quality of tree.
39 >
40 > Do you have any idea how much time me, and aballier spent to make
41 > cdparanoia's build system as clean as it is now? And then to coordinate
42 > them with upstream xiph.org?
43 > Then I see this... Not acceptable by any standards.
44 >
45 >
46
47 So you would rather see me patch the makefile to drop the slib targets
48 conditionaly or alter whole src_compile to not run all but just lib on
49 the required options?
50 Both will take more space in the ebuild....
51 Or should I actually make the build system correct and rewrite it into
52 automake to use libtool?
53 Both take quite a lot time and since you state that you waste so much
54 on the build system anyway why didn't you fix it even before?
55 Anyway Since you are in the herd feel free to revert it as you already did so.
56
57 For that I have question, WHY THE FUCK DID YOU REVERT IT NOT USING ANY
58 CHANGELOG MESSAGE? If you would log this you would prevent others from
59 doing the same commit as me in the future, but yeah they are
60 developers they should use cvs log on the directory to see what samuli
61 had on his mind this time...
62
63 Anyway for they yajl i tried to submit patches for the build system
64 once and upstream is not interested so this is clear solution to solve
65 the issue without me having to patch half of the CMakeLists.txt.

Replies