[gentoo-dev] [EBUILD] unknown description
Hi, I try to make a deadbeef ebuild I have two unknown description ( faad and zip ) - - faad : unknown description - - zip : unknown description DEADBEEF README: ... faad2: for AAC plugin libzip: for vfs_zip plugin ... Here is a brief description of my ebuild : IUSE=... faad zip ... RDEPEND=... faad? ( media-libs/faad2 ) zip? ( dev-libs/libzip ) I looked the other ebuild using faad ( mpd, mplayer... ) but I see no difference with mine. For libzip I think I did not use the correct flag. -- Sp4ze
Re: [gentoo-dev] new virtual: virtual/podofo-build
On 10/15/2014 05:36 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote: In order to solve bug #503802 [1], I would like to add a virtual/podofo-build package to pull in app-text/podofo and dev-libs/boost. Then packages like app-text/calibre can put virtual/podofo-build in DEPEND and app-text/podofo in RDEPEND. This sounds a bit like a one-time solution for a problem that occurs more frequently... It would be nice to have a more generic solution. :| If A depends on B, and in order to build A you need C, but in order to run B you do not need C, does it make sense to specify C as a dependency of B, rather than as a dependency of A? The risk I would see is whether that relationship holds 100% of the time. What if somebody comes up with an alternative to boost that is not 100% compatible, but it works for calibre (but not other packages that DEPEND on podofo)? I can see how this approach would work for something like split-headers. However, when you get into things like build systems it seems like this could be problematic. However, I haven't been thinking about this for 3 years... :) Here's where virtuals are more flexible than the BADEPEND suggested in bug 392239. If we later find that virtual/podofo-build works for calibre but not some other reverse-dependency of podofo, then we can always create a different virtual to put in DEPEND of said reverse-dependency. -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-dev] [EBUILD] unknown description
On 17 October 2014 08:54, sp4ze sp...@sp4ze.net wrote: I looked the other ebuild using faad ( mpd, mplayer... ) but I see no difference with mine. grep faad /usr/portage/media-video/mplayer/metadata.xml flag name=faadUse external faad library for AAC decoding/flag grep faad /usr/portage/media-sound/mpd/metadata.xml flag name=faadUse external faad library for AAC decoding/flag -- Kent *KENTNL* - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL
Re: [gentoo-dev] [EBUILD] unknown description
I missed the gentoo manual page metadata. shame on me Thx Kent -- Sp4ze
Re: [gentoo-dev] [EBUILD] unknown description
And if faad is *required* for aac it should not use faad as USE flag, but aac. Because in the case of mplayer it's selecting faad *over libavcodec*. In other cases faad is depended upon with aac because it is required to play back aac files. Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ On 16 October 2014 20:57, Kent Fredric kentfred...@gmail.com wrote: On 17 October 2014 08:54, sp4ze sp...@sp4ze.net wrote: I looked the other ebuild using faad ( mpd, mplayer... ) but I see no difference with mine. grep faad /usr/portage/media-video/mplayer/metadata.xml flag name=faadUse external faad library for AAC decoding/flag grep faad /usr/portage/media-sound/mpd/metadata.xml flag name=faadUse external faad library for AAC decoding/flag -- Kent *KENTNL* - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL
