Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
On Thursday 07 July 2005 03:14, Aron Griffis wrote: Roy Marples wrote:[Wed Jul 06 2005, 08:51:17PM EDT] ebuilds could be changed over time - unless I'm missing something basic here .. Yes, you're missing the default functions. Presently src_compile does (effectively) econf emake if the function isn't defined. That would be broken into two default functions now, but none of the ebuilds have src_configure defined, so it would be broken for all of them. Another issue is the fact that current portage versions will not work with ebuilds with the new format. The format code at least should be out for a while before changing the ebuilds over. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net pgpS7kS8XObEc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
Jonathan Smith wrote:
you could simply make the default:
src_configure() {
[ -f ./configure ] econf || die
}
No need, this will do fine as a default:
src_configure() {
econf || die
}
Since econf already checks for a configure script and does nothing if it can't
find one...
Daniel
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
On 07/07/05, Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
src_configure() {
econf || die
}
Since econf already checks for a configure script and does nothing if it can't
find one...
Yours might do. The one I have in /usr/sbin/ebuild.sh from portage
2.0.51.22-r1 says this:
econf() {
»···local LOCAL_EXTRA_ECONF=${EXTRA_ECONF}
»···if [ -z ${ECONF_SOURCE} ]; then
»···»···ECONF_SOURCE=.
»···fi
»···if [ -x ${ECONF_SOURCE}/configure ]; then
+- 78 lines: if [ -e /usr/share/gnuconfig/ ]; then--
»···else
»···»···die no configure script found
»···fi
}
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 02:04 +0200, Sven Wegener wrote: Hi all! I'm writing this mail to bring you a thought we had over on freenode in the #gentoo-portage channel. We would like to split up src_compile. The new src_configure should just do the econf part and src_compile should do the emake part. This represents the general 3-step[1] installation in a much better way. Will make debugging compile failures much easier imho. -- Martin Schlemmer Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer Cape Town, South Africa signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
On 07/07/05, Sven Wegener [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm writing this mail to bring you a thought we had over on freenode in the #gentoo-portage channel. We would like to split up src_compile. The new src_configure should just do the econf part and src_compile should do the emake part. This represents the general 3-step[1] installation in a much better way. Whilst you're at it... Why not split unpack up into, say, unpack and prepare? Make src_unpack's default stay the same and use src_prepare for patches and autotools things? This will avoid the pointless duplication of the default src_unpack code that's currently used in many ebuilds. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 15:25 +0100, twofourtysix wrote: Whilst you're at it... Why not split unpack up into, say, unpack and prepare? Make src_unpack's default stay the same and use src_prepare for patches and autotools things? This will avoid the pointless duplication of the default src_unpack code that's currently used in many ebuilds. Not a bad idea, actually... ./Brix -- Henrik Brix Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
On Thursday 07 July 2005 02:04, Sven Wegener wrote: We would like to split up src_compile. The new src_configure should just do the econf part and src_compile should do the emake part. That will be very very interesting but... but not everything uses ./configure, so we should add a bunch of dummy src_configure, and a call to econf || die for those packages not fixed to use that will return a bunch of erroneous packages not compiling. -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgpbHveMXAjRf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sven Wegener wrote: Hi all! I'm writing this mail to bring you a thought we had over on freenode in the #gentoo-portage channel. We would like to split up src_compile. The new src_configure should just do the econf part and src_compile should do the emake part. This represents the general 3-step[1] installation in a much better way. Regards, Sven [1] ./configure make make install I made some patches[1] to do this years ago, I was told by the portage devs at the time (can't remember who) that they should probably be includes some time in the future. Maybe now is the time? 1: http://dev.gentoo.org/~port001/Patches/configure-ebuild.sh.patch http://dev.gentoo.org/~port001/Patches/configure-portage-py.patch (NOTE: these probably don't apply anymore, seeing as they were made in december 2003). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCzIYXefZ4eWAXRGIRAuNNAKCQHoEqZ/vsMiOORxt27veqar4gkQCfdFLT daFN7flKJXqo7eCEDfMYJGQ= =fhld -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 08:27 pm, Jonathan Smith wrote:
you could simply make the default:
src_configure() {
[ -f ./configure ] econf || die
}
well you cant because then die would be called if ./configure isnt a file but
i think that's irrelevant to the point you're trying to make ;)
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
On Thursday 07 July 2005 02:27, Jonathan Smith wrote:
src_configure() {
[ -f ./configure ] econf || die
}
I'm not still convinced about this.
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò
Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
(Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM)
pgprfAEphLu8T.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
Jonathan Smith wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 07 July 2005 02:04, Sven Wegener wrote:
We would like to split up src_compile. The
new src_configure should just do the econf part and src_compile should
do the emake part.
That will be very very interesting but... but not everything uses ./configure,
so we should add a bunch of dummy src_configure, and a call to econf || die
for those packages not fixed to use that will return a bunch of erroneous
packages not compiling.
you could simply make the default:
src_configure() {
[ -f ./configure ] econf || die
}
- --
smithj
Gentoo Developer
[ desktop stuff netmon documentation ]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCzHcJl5AvwDPiUowRAqeFAJwIxve3a/X5BnlSBOxfv/Ac2lMAaACg30Pg
62/3CVfdiHVSppJfEe73DsY=
=lK9Q
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
By order of operations that won't work...I think you'll have to do if/then.
if [ -f ./configure ]
then
econf || die
fi
But that's a possible solution for sure. It would still introduce a lot
of ebuild editing for those ebuilds doing special conf stuff though.
Joshua Baergen
P.S. I tried sending this earlier but my client barfed, so I apologize
if it ends up double.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 02:04:04 +0200
Sven Wegener [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We would like to split up src_compile. The new src_configure
should just do the econf part and src_compile should do the
emake part.
Just by curiosity, i've run a grep on the tree to count occurences
of ^[[:space:]]*econf and ^[[:space:]]*\..*/configure in
ebuilds. Here are the results (that's numbers of ebuilds, not
packages, grouped by the number of econf/configure they have):
1: 5736
2: 182
3: 12
4: 3
5: 2
7: 3
I would have thought this figures would be much worst, but that's
actually a few tenths of packages with 2 config calls, and only
~10 with 3+.
Looking at some random ebuilds with 2+ econf/configure, it seems
that the most frequent pattern is something like that:
src_compile() {
econf || die
emake || die
if use foo ; then
cd ${S}/foo-plugin
econf || die
emake || die
fi
}
Sure, spliting that will produce a bit of code duplication. It's
a bit less readable imho, but that's really just a cosmetic
issue:
src_configure() {
econf || die
if use foo ; then
cd ${S}/foo-plugin
econf || die
fi
}
src_compile() {
emake || die
if use foo ; then
cd ${S}/foo-plugin
emake || die
fi
}
I've also searched for some more problematic ebuilds, like some
which would configure build the same source several times
(x11-libs/wxGTK maybe, also i'm not really sure) or some which
would first configure and build a libfoo/ subtree, and then
configure and build the main program (did not found any of that
kind, but i would not be surprised some exists).
If anyone want to have a look on my list to find some package
that may be problematic, it's here:
http://tdegreni.free.fr/gentoo/ebuilds_with_two_or_more_configure.list
(disclaimer: yup, keep in mind i've just done a quick grep on
the tree - this figures might not be completly meaningless, but
are for sure not accurate)
--
TGL.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] src_configure
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: That will be very very interesting but... but not everything uses ./configure, so we should add a bunch of dummy src_configure, and a call to econf || die for those packages not fixed to use that will return a bunch of erroneous packages not compiling. I know some packages off the top of my head, like Perl and OpenSSL use their own odd variants of configure. There are likely many others. Kernel ebuilds probably need special treatment, as they don't really go through a configure and compile phase. --Kumba -- Gentoo/MIPS Team Lead Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere. --Elrond -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
