Diogo Dutra wrote:
> Hi guys, I have found a bug in makepkg, the makepkg -b dont install
> builded packages as depencies, it install as explicited packages and
> it is not good, I make a patch that revolve this problem.
>
> Im sorry for any mistakes of mine.
>
>
This doesn't look bad but I am never very confident with makepkg
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
05-01-2008, 12:49 PM
Allan McRae
makepkg -b is wrong
Xavier wrote:
> Diogo Dutra wrote:
>
>> Hi guys, I have found a bug in makepkg, the makepkg -b dont install
>> builded packages as depencies, it install as explicited packages and
>> it is not good, I make a patch that revolve this problem.
>>
>> Im sorry for any mistakes of mine.
>>
>>
>>
>
> This doesn't look bad but I am never very confident with makepkg
>
This patch looks good.
The description of the --asdeps option should be "Install package as a
dependency"
Allan
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
05-01-2008, 01:03 PM
"Dan McGee"
makepkg -b is wrong
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Allan McRae <mcrae_allan@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Xavier wrote:
> > Diogo Dutra wrote:
> >
> >> Hi guys, I have found a bug in makepkg, the makepkg -b dont install
> >> builded packages as depencies, it install as explicited packages and
> >> it is not good, I make a patch that revolve this problem.
> >>
> >> Im sorry for any mistakes of mine.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > This doesn't look bad but I am never very confident with makepkg
> >
> This patch looks good.
>
> <snip>
> + echo "$(gettext " --asdeps Install package as
> dependencies")"
> <snip>
>
> The description of the --asdeps option should be "Install package as a
> dependency"
Haven't even looked at the patch yet, but should we really even be
keeping this -b option around in makepkg? It seems like something
another script (such as makeworld) should do. This isn't emerge here.
-Dan
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
05-01-2008, 01:17 PM
Allan McRae
makepkg -b is wrong
Dan McGee wrote:
>
> Haven't even looked at the patch yet, but should we really even be
> keeping this -b option around in makepkg? It seems like something
> another script (such as makeworld) should do. This isn't emerge here.
>
>
I assume it can be used to build a dependency tree from packages in the
AUR. Although, you need to go through the hassle of downloading all the
PKGBUILDs anyway so you might as well build them as you go. Also, the
method for finding the directory to build in is a hack... find all
directories in $SRCROOT that match the $dep and try running makepkg in
all of them. That is a bit ugly...
Allan
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
05-01-2008, 02:38 PM
"Diogo Dutra"
makepkg -b is wrong
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:03 AM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Allan McRae <mcrae_allan@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Xavier wrote:
> > > Diogo Dutra wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi guys, I have found a bug in makepkg, the makepkg -b dont install
> > >> builded packages as depencies, it install as explicited packages and
> > >> it is not good, I make a patch that revolve this problem.
> > >>
> > >> Im sorry for any mistakes of mine.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > This doesn't look bad but I am never very confident with makepkg
> > >
> > This patch looks good.
> >
> > <snip>
> > + echo "$(gettext " --asdeps Install package as
> > dependencies")"
> > <snip>
> >
> > The description of the --asdeps option should be "Install package as a
> > dependency"
Yes, the package is only one, not plural, it is more correct... and
this is my first patch submmited online, I dont have experiencies with
this.
>
> Haven't even looked at the patch yet, but should we really even be
> keeping this -b option around in makepkg? It seems like something
> another script (such as makeworld) should do. This isn't emerge here.
>
> -Dan
I agree with you, but I think the -b continue existing as -s, but -b
instead execute makepkg in recursive mode, my idea is implementing the
find deps $SCRROOT in another script (such as makeworld?) and -b call
this script as -s call pacman, because I think -b and -s have to
coexist.
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
05-01-2008, 02:43 PM
"Diogo Dutra"
makepkg -b is wrong
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Allan McRae <mcrae_allan@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Dan McGee wrote:
> >
> > Haven't even looked at the patch yet, but should we really even be
> > keeping this -b option around in makepkg? It seems like something
> > another script (such as makeworld) should do. This isn't emerge here.
> >
> >
>
> I assume it can be used to build a dependency tree from packages in the
> AUR. Although, you need to go through the hassle of downloading all the
> PKGBUILDs anyway so you might as well build them as you go. Also, the
> method for finding the directory to build in is a hack... find all
> directories in $SRCROOT that match the $dep and try running makepkg in
> all of them. That is a bit ugly...
>
> Allan
Talking in $SRCROOT, for me is a good idea if it receives multi-dirs,
like $SRCROOT=('/var/abs/core' '/var/abs/local/aur')
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
05-02-2008, 08:13 AM
Xavier
makepkg -b is wrong
Diogo Dutra wrote:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:03 AM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with you, but I think the -b continue existing as -s, but -b
> instead execute makepkg in recursive mode, my idea is implementing the
> find deps $SCRROOT in another script (such as makeworld?) and -b call
> this script as -s call pacman, because I think -b and -s have to
> coexist.
>
I don't think they have to coexist.
I used -s a billion times (well, every single time makepkg complained
about missing deps), and I didn't use -b once. And I would think I am
not alone in that case.
Anyway, if you move that code from makepkg to put it in another script,
it doesn't make any sense to keep that option in makepkg.
Just have that script call "find" and then "makepkg" (with your --asdeps
fix).
Any chances you could investigate if it can fit in makeworld? Otherwise
in a new script on its own?
This script would probably sit better next to makeworld in abs git repo
and abs package rather than with pacman/makepkg.
Just in case, abs git repo is there :
http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=abs.git;a=summary
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
05-02-2008, 07:47 PM
"Diogo Dutra"
makepkg -b is wrong
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 5:13 AM, Xavier <shiningxc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Diogo Dutra wrote:
> > On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:03 AM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree with you, but I think the -b continue existing as -s, but -b
> > instead execute makepkg in recursive mode, my idea is implementing the
> > find deps $SCRROOT in another script (such as makeworld?) and -b call
> > this script as -s call pacman, because I think -b and -s have to
> > coexist.
> >
>
> I don't think they have to coexist.
> I used -s a billion times (well, every single time makepkg complained
> about missing deps), and I didn't use -b once. And I would think I am
> not alone in that case.
>
> Anyway, if you move that code from makepkg to put it in another script,
> it doesn't make any sense to keep that option in makepkg.
> Just have that script call "find" and then "makepkg" (with your --asdeps
> fix).
> Any chances you could investigate if it can fit in makeworld? Otherwise
> in a new script on its own?
> This script would probably sit better next to makeworld in abs git repo
> and abs package rather than with pacman/makepkg.
> Just in case, abs git repo is there :
> http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=abs.git;a=summary
Yes, I understand you, is more right this script calls makepkg than
makepkg calls this script, I have look the makeworld script and its
not complicated to me, I will work with it and post here some
progress, maybe another script could be add in abs.
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
05-03-2008, 02:34 PM
"Dan McGee"
makepkg -b is wrong
A quick deletion attempt. It would clear out some gunk out of makepkg,
as well as removing the SRCROOT var from makepkg.conf and the
reference from makepkg.8.
- if [ "$DEP_SRC" = "0" -a "$DEP_BIN" = "0" ]; then
+ if [ "$DEP_BIN" = "0" ]; then
return $R_DEPS_MISSING
fi
@@ -358,40 +357,6 @@ handledeps() {
error "$(gettext "Pacman failed to install missing dependencies.")"
exit 1 # TODO: error code
fi
- elif [ "$DEP_SRC" = "1" ]; then
- msg "$(gettext "Building missing dependencies...")"
-
- # install missing deps by building them from source.
- # we look for each package name in $SRCROOT and build it.
- if [ "$SRCROOT" = "" ]; then
- error "$(gettext "Source root cannot be found - please make sure
it is specified in %s.")" "$confdir/makepkg.conf"
- exit 1 # TODO: error code
- fi
-
- # TODO: handle version comparators (eg, glibc>=2.2.5)
- for dep in $striplist; do
- local candidates="$(find "$SRCROOT" -type d -name "$dep")"
- if [ "$candidates" = "" ]; then
- error "$(gettext "Could not find '%s' under %s")" "$dep" "$SRCROOT"
- exit 1 # TODO: error code
- fi
-
- local makepkg_opts='-i -c -b'
- [ "$RMDEPS" = "1" ] && makepkg_opts="$makepkg_opts -r"
- [ "$ASROOT" = "1" ] && makepkg_opts="$makepkg_opts --asroot"
- local ret packagedir
- for packagedir in $candidates; do
- if [ -f "$packagedir/$BUILDSCRIPT" ]; then
- cd "$packagedir"
- ret=0
- PKGDEST="$PKGDEST" makepkg $makepkg_opts $PACMAN_OPTS || ret=$?
- [ $ret -eq 0 ] && continue 2
- fi
- done
-
- error "$(gettext "Failed to build '%s'")" "$dep"
- exit 1 # TODO: error code
- done
fi
# rerun any additional sh scripts found in /etc/profile.d/
@@ -421,7 +386,7 @@ resolve_deps() {
# check deps again to make sure they were resolved
deplist="$(check_deps $*)"
[ "$deplist" = "" ] && return $R_DEPS_SATISFIED
- elif [ "$DEP_BIN" = "1" -o "$DEP_SRC" = "1" ]; then
+ elif [ "$DEP_BIN" = "1" ]; then
error "$(gettext "Failed to install all missing dependencies.")"
fi
@@ -1092,7 +1057,6 @@ usage() {
echo
echo "$(gettext "Options:")"
printf "$(gettext " -A, --ignorearch Ignore incomplete arch field
in %s")
" "$BUILDSCRIPT"
- echo "$(gettext " -b, --builddeps Build missing dependencies from source")"
echo "$(gettext " -c, --clean Clean up work files after build")"
echo "$(gettext " -C, --cleancache Clean up source files from the cache")"
echo "$(gettext " -d, --nodeps Skip all dependency checks")"
@@ -1188,7 +1152,6 @@ while true; do
# Makepkg Options
--asroot) ASROOT=1 ;;
-A|--ignorearch) IGNOREARCH=1 ;;
- -b|--builddeps) DEP_SRC=1 ;;
-c|--clean) CLEANUP=1 ;;
-C|--cleancache) CLEANCACHE=1 ;;
-d|--nodeps) NODEPS=1 ;;
@@ -1297,7 +1260,7 @@ else
fi
# check for sudo if we will need it during makepkg execution
-if [ "$ASROOT" = "0" -a ( "$DEP_BIN" = "1" -o "$DEP_SRC" = "1"
+if [ "$ASROOT" = "0" -a ( "$DEP_BIN" = "1"
-o "$RMDEPS" = "1" -o "$INSTALL" = "1" ) ]; then
if [ ! "$(type -p sudo)" ]; then
error "$(gettext "Cannot find the sudo binary! Is sudo installed?")"
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
05-07-2008, 02:43 AM
Karolina Lindqvist
makepkg -b is wrong
fredagen den 2 maj 2008 skrev Xavier:
> I don't think they have to coexist.
> I used -s a billion times (well, every single time makepkg complained
> about missing deps), and I didn't use -b once. And I would think I am
> not alone in that case.
I have used -b a million times. If you want to build a single package, with
all dependencies, from source, you need it. Co-existence of -s and -b would
make it much more useful. Actually, I used such a version when:
makepkg -b is wrong
