[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] Very bad ebuild-writing practice.
From:       Alexander Gretencord <arutha () gmx ! de>
Date:       2002-08-18 14:46:18
[Download RAW message or body]

Dan Naumov wrote:
>>But suppose someone did want an ebuild for the hourly CVS snapshots?
>>How should it be named?
> 
> My personal belief is that ebuilds of hourly CVS snapshots should
> never leave the PORTDIR_OVERLAY of the original author. IMHO, 
 > Gentoo Portage is no place for autogenerated, untested CVS stuff.
 > How are you going to go around non-compiling snapshots of broken
 > trees and new compile options that appear from time to timw
 > anyways ?

Well I think we do need such ebuilds _but_ they gotta be named 
accordingly. You have to see that it is a cvs ebuild. I for one use 
mplayer as my multimedia player of choice but I won't use the ebuild 
because mplayer releases don't come too often. For a very long time 
there was just the 0.60 release of mplayer which sucked, while cvs 
always builds (just personal exp tho) and has tons of features. I have 
not bothered to look at the cvs eclass and build my mplayer myself but 
mplayer is such an example where a cvs ebuild would be great. Another 
example is is kde. Why not use the convenience of portage to test the 
latest kde.

Alex

_______________________________________________
gentoo-dev mailing list
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]