Holy long thread batman! I'll chip in a little but looks like this one
has already run most of its course.
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 6:14 AM, Xavier <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Loui <email@example.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 May 2008 06:25:36 +0200
>> Geoffroy Carrier <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> Excerpts from louipc.ist's message of Mon May 19 07:39:45 +0200 2008:
>>> > It would be nice if all three were referenced. I wouldn't feel right if
>>> > $startdir disappeared.
>>> In the .proto files?
>> Yeah. A prime place to demonstrate all the variables, non?
The *prime* place should be the manpage, not the proto file. Obviously
the proto file should provide a reasonable template, but no need to
clutter it with unnecessary use of $startdir if $srcdir/$pkgdir can
cover it all.
So on that note, we should ensure we have startdir, srcdir, and pkgdir
all documented in PKGBUILD.5. Looks like currently we have none of
> I actually also see several advantages for not using $startdir :
> 1) pkgdir and srcdir could be independent
> 2) shorter and nicer
> 3) prevents you from accessing files directly from $startdir :
> All files in use need to be put in source array, and these files are
> copied from $startdir to $srcdir.
> So $srcdir has everything you need. If you use $startdir however, you
> can forget to put a file in source array, and you won't notice it
> (that is why namcap prints a warning for that, but you need to use
> and I personally would find it clearer to either use only
> $pkgdir/$srcdir or only $startdir.
I'm with Xavier here. I think we have reached the point where we can
transition to 90% of our usage to being $srcdir/$pkgdir with $startdir
only being used in some very specialized cases. As srcdir/pkgdir were
introduced with 3.1, 3.2 can safely provide default PKGBUILDs using
pacman-dev mailing list