Dnia 2014-02-20, o godz. 14:12:17 Lars Wendler <polynomia...@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
> So what can we do? Three solutions came to my mind which I list
> here in the order first being my favorite, last being my least
> favorite:
>
> 1.)
> Make portage's unpack function lzip compatible
Three packages still don't sound like something to add to EAPI. Even
with ten, I would have my doubts. Reading the whole thread, lzip
doesn't seem like it's going to live long. Trying to artificially force
it upon people is only going to give opposite results.
> 2.)
> Fix this on ebuild level:
> - add app-arch/lzip to DEPEND
> - add something like
> 'tar --lzip -xf "${DISTDIR}"/${P}.tar.lz || die'
> to a custom src_unpack() function.
Either that, or add it to unpacker.eclass and use it. That's the place
where we handle all the random cruft, and where we can fix it as
problems arise.
> 3.)
> Provide all affected source tarballs ourselves in a portage compatible
> compressed format.
I think that'd be a waste of effort, to be honest. I think using lzip
(and lzip only) is the problem, and we shouldn't bury it like this.
> 4.)
> Try very hard to convince upstream to provide sources in differently
> compressed tarballs.
If you can't convince them yourself, let our users do that. Gentoo is
pretty specific in the way people handle extra dependencies they find
unnecessary :).
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
