On 30/10/12 22:18, Michał Górny wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 17:08:07 -0300
Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 21:57:11 +0200
Samuli Suominen <ssuomi...@gentoo.org> wrote:
On 30/10/12 21:56, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 19:08:39 +0000 (UTC)
"Samuli Suominen (ssuominen)" <ssuomi...@gentoo.org> wrote:
[...]
case ${EAPI:-0} in
0|1|2|3|4) ;;
*) die "${ECLASS}.eclass API in EAPI ${EAPI} not yet
established." esac
sounds like a useless and annoying check for just exporting one
function
RDEPEND=""
useless?
if the ebuild is EAPI=0 or EAPI=1 then DEPEND expands to RDEPEND, so
setting empty RDEPEND prevents that, or am I missing something?
even with eclasses and inheritence ? maybe you're right but i wouldnt
bet anything
DEPEND="virtual/pkgconfig"
# @FUNCTION: _udev_get_udevdir
# @INTERNAL
# @DESCRIPTION:
# Get unprefixed udevdir.
_udev_get_udevdir() {
if $($(tc-getPKG_CONFIG) --exists udev); then
echo -n "$($(tc-getPKG_CONFIG) --variable=udevdir
udev)" else
echo -n /lib/udev
fi
}
# @FUNCTION: udev_get_udevdir
# @DESCRIPTION:
# Output the path for the udev directory (not including ${D}).
# This function always succeeds, even if udev is not installed.
# The fallback value is set to /lib/udev
udev_get_udevdir() {
has "${EAPI:-0}" 0 1 2 && ! use prefix && EPREFIX=
debug-print-function ${FUNCNAME} "${@}"
echo -n "${EPREFIX}$(_udev_get_udevdir)"
}
local foo=""
unfold _udev_get_udevdir there, replacing 'echo -n' by foo=
printf ...$foo
kill the extra internal fucntion that seems useless.
echo isn't really reliable for precise formatting, prefer printf
when it matters. (in this case it doesn't matter but seems good
practices)
have you checked what is the udevdir value on prefix, if at all
relevant ? I fear a double prefix issue.
the code is more or less same as systemd.eclass has, I don't want to
diverge too much from that since we are essentially dealing with the
same package (tarball)
well, two bad do not make a good
consider the above remarks to apply to systemd.eclass too then, and
either explain why they're not relevant or apply them to both eclasses
if you want to avoid divergence.
Don't even try to touch any of my eclasses without prior asking.
And the additional internal function there was used in order to get
unprefixed path for do*() and new*() functions.
same as i'll propably reuse the function for something like
$(do_udev_rules) later on
the udev.eclass might have one function now, but that's just a
rudementary start to drop most of the duplication from ebuilds
