Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-30 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne 29.8.2011 21:24, Nathan Phillip Brink napsal(a): On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 10:35:41AM +0200, Tom Chv??tal wrote: How about this attachment? :) # @FUNCTION: openoffice-ext_add_extension # @DESCRIPTION: # Install the extension into the office suite. openoffice-ext_add_extension() {

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-30 Thread Ulrich Mueller
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: See the attachment for the latest version :) # @FUNCTION: office-ext_get_implementation [...] for i in ${implementations[$@]}; do I think this should read ${implementations[@]} instead, if the intention is to loop over all array elements. #

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-30 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne 30.8.2011 09:02, Ulrich Mueller napsal(a): On Tue, 30 Aug 2011, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: See the attachment for the latest version :) # @FUNCTION: office-ext_get_implementation [...] for i in ${implementations[$@]}; do I think this should read ${implementations[@]} instead, if

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-30 Thread Michał Górny
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 09:26:16 +0200 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote: # @FUNCTION: office-ext_remove_extension [...] ${UNOPKG_BINARY} remove --shared ${ext} \ Not sure what unopkg accepts, but I guess you want to pass several arguments here. So ${ext} shouldn't be quoted.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-30 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne 30.8.2011 09:49, Michał Górny napsal(a): On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 09:26:16 +0200 Tomáš Chvátalscarab...@gentoo.org wrote: # @FUNCTION: office-ext_remove_extension [...] ${UNOPKG_BINARY} remove --shared ${ext} \ Not sure what unopkg accepts, but I guess you want to pass several

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Hi, Please see the attached eclass that allows us installation of plugins for libre(open)office with some easy manner. Any suggestions and improvements welcome. Cheers Tom # Copyright 1999-2011 Gentoo Foundation # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 # $Header: $

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Maxim Koltsov
Hi Thomas, Why EAPI=3 is not supported? UNOPKG_BINARY=${EPREFIX}/usr/bin/unopkg On my machine unopkg is at '/usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/unopkg' (libreoffice-bin), so this can be a problem.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Michał Górny
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:11:31 +0200 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote: # @ECLASS: openoffice.eclass Ekhm. Also I think, you should use 'openoffice' in the name anyway, or 'libreoffice', or whatever suggesting the actual office packages branch. # @ECLASS-VARIABLE: OOO_EXTENSIONS #

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne 29.8.2011 09:20, Maxim Koltsov napsal(a): Hi Thomas, Why EAPI=3 is not supported? I think we should always use the latest, and this is probably only way how to force you lads to do so. Also it saves me from having to do needless || die :) You have any reason why require eapi3?

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne 29.8.2011 09:24, Michał Górny napsal(a): On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:11:31 +0200 Tomáš Chvátalscarab...@gentoo.org wrote: # @ECLASS: openoffice.eclass Ekhm. Also I think, you should use 'openoffice' in the name anyway, or 'libreoffice', or whatever suggesting the actual office packages

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
# @ECLASS-VARIABLE: OOO_EXTENSIONS # @REQUIRED # @DEFAULT_UNSET I don't think you're supposed to mix these two. Why? It make perfect sense, it is both required and empty by default. Also git-2.eclass use the same and it works.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Michał Górny
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:39:16 +0200 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote: # @ECLASS-VARIABLE: OOO_EXTENSIONS # @REQUIRED # @DEFAULT_UNSET I don't think you're supposed to mix these two. Why? It make perfect sense, it is both required and empty by default. It is redundant. If a

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Maxim Koltsov
2011/8/29 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org: Dne 29.8.2011 09:20, Maxim Koltsov napsal(a): Hi Thomas, Why EAPI=3 is not supported? I think we should always use the latest, and this is probably only way how to force you lads to do so. Also it saves me from having to do needless || die :)

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
How about this attachment? :) # Copyright 1999-2011 Gentoo Foundation # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 # $Header: $ # @ECLASS: office-ext.eclass # @MAINTAINER: # The office team openoff...@gentoo.org # @BLURB: Eclass for installing libreoffice/openoffice

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne 29.8.2011 10:24, Maxim Koltsov napsal(a): No reason, i just like backaward compability :) But this is not backcompat this will be completely new and the packages that will be added never were in main tree :-) Done, https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=381009 Thanks

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Maxim Koltsov
2011/8/29 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org: Dne 29.8.2011 10:24, Maxim Koltsov napsal(a): No reason, i just like backaward compability :) But this is not backcompat this will be completely new and the packages that will be added never were in main tree :-) Oh yes, you're right. I just

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Michał Górny
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 10:35:41 +0200 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote: case ${EAPI:-0} in 4) OEXT_EXPORTED_FUNCTIONS=src_install pkg_postinst pkg_prerm ;; *) die EAPI=${EAPI} is not supported ;; esac EXPORT_FUNCTIONS ${OEXT_EXPORTED_FUNCTIONS} unset OEXT_EXPORTED_FUNCTIONS --

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne 29.8.2011 10:57, Maxim Koltsov napsal(a): 2011/8/29 Tomáš Chvátalscarab...@gentoo.org: Dne 29.8.2011 10:24, Maxim Koltsov napsal(a): No reason, i just like backaward compability :) But this is not backcompat this will be completely new and the packages that will be added never were in

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] office-ext.eclass

2011-08-29 Thread Fabian Groffen
On 29-08-2011 19:24:24 +, Nathan Phillip Brink wrote: On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 10:35:41AM +0200, Tom Chv??tal wrote: How about this attachment? :) # @FUNCTION: openoffice-ext_add_extension # @DESCRIPTION: # Install the extension into the office suite.