Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Gentoo Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-development/)
-   -   epatch_user usage (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-development/659050-epatch_user-usage.html)

Doug Goldstein 04-24-2012 03:45 AM

epatch_user usage
 
So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone
have a suggested way to handle this?

Thanks.
--
Doug Goldstein

Arun Raghavan 04-24-2012 03:57 AM

epatch_user usage
 
On 24 April 2012 09:15, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> wrote:
> So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
> users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
> eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
> sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
> existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone
> have a suggested way to handle this?

grub2 checks for a DO_AUTORECONF env. var. to decide whether to run
eautoreconf. This does cause some QA warnings, though.

--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)

Michał Górny 04-24-2012 04:05 AM

epatch_user usage
 
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:45:36 -0500
Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> wrote:

> So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
> users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
> eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
> sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
> existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone
> have a suggested way to handle this?

inherit autotools-utils

--
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Mike Frysinger 04-24-2012 04:10 AM

epatch_user usage
 
On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote:
> So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
> users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
> eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
> sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
> existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone
> have a suggested way to handle this?

just always call it when the user applies patches. i don't see a big deal.
epatch_user && eautoreconf
-mike

Alexandre Rostovtsev 04-24-2012 04:14 AM

epatch_user usage
 
On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 06:05 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:45:36 -0500
> Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
> > users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
> > eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
> > sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
> > existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone
> > have a suggested way to handle this?
>
> inherit autotools-utils

That doesn't help the numerous packages that don't ship some of the
autoconf macros they use in their source tarball, and therefore require
additional build-time dependencies (gnome-common, gtk-doc-am, and so
forth) to provide the macros needed for eautoreconf.

-Alexandre.

Michał Górny 04-24-2012 04:15 AM

epatch_user usage
 
On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:10:30 -0400
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
> > users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
> > eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
> > sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
> > existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does
> > anyone have a suggested way to handle this?
>
> just always call it when the user applies patches. i don't see a big
> deal. epatch_user && eautoreconf
> -mike

No configure.{ac,in} present!

--
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Michał Górny 04-24-2012 04:18 AM

epatch_user usage
 
On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:14:15 -0400
Alexandre Rostovtsev <tetromino@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 06:05 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:45:36 -0500
> > Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for
> > > allowing users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to
> > > run eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it
> > > unconditionally but sometimes users have patches which touch
> > > autoconf files but my existing patch set doesn't so I'm not
> > > calling eautoreconf. Does anyone have a suggested way to handle
> > > this?
> >
> > inherit autotools-utils
>
> That doesn't help the numerous packages that don't ship some of the
> autoconf macros they use in their source tarball, and therefore
> require additional build-time dependencies (gnome-common, gtk-doc-am,
> and so forth) to provide the macros needed for eautoreconf.

We can't help them unless you want the whole tree (including those
packages) to forcedly depend on them.

It's simply better just to assume: if user wants user patches, he/she
needs to have necessary deps installed.

--
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Mike Frysinger 04-24-2012 04:25 AM

epatch_user usage
 
On Tuesday 24 April 2012 00:15:45 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:10:30 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > > So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
> > > users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
> > > eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
> > > sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
> > > existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does
> > > anyone have a suggested way to handle this?
> >
> > just always call it when the user applies patches. i don't see a big
> > deal. epatch_user && eautoreconf
>
> No configure.{ac,in} present!

if the package doesn't have configure.{ac,in} files, then why would he be
talking about eautoreconf ?
-mike

Mike Frysinger 04-24-2012 04:27 AM

epatch_user usage
 
On Tuesday 24 April 2012 00:18:59 Michał Górny wrote:
> It's simply better just to assume: if user wants user patches, he/she
> needs to have necessary deps installed.

if the package doesn't ever run autotools itself, i think this assumption is
fine. set AUTOTOOLS_AUTO_DEPEND=no before inherting things and always run
autotools if the user applies patches. otherwise we penalize a lot of people
who don't apply custom patches.
-mike

Doug Goldstein 04-24-2012 04:33 AM

epatch_user usage
 
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote:
>> So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing
>> users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run
>> eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but
>> sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my
>> existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone
>> have a suggested way to handle this?
>
> just always call it when the user applies patches. *i don't see a big deal.
> * * * *epatch_user && eautoreconf
> -mike

That works. I was wondering if you guys did anything more crafty but
this is fine.

Thanks all for the input.

--
Doug Goldstein


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:26 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.