Re: [proaudio] patchage-9999

[Dominique Michel <dominique.michel@xxxxxxxxx>]

Le Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:53:09 +0000,
Gavin Pryke <gavinlee303@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

> On Friday 09 November 2012 00:56:20 Dominique Michel wrote:
> > Le Thu, 8 Nov 2012 19:59:52 +0100,
> > 
> > Dominique Michel <dominique.michel@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> > > I am reviewing the patchage live ebuild.
> > > 
> > > It is 2 good news with:
> > > 1) it work and was relatively easy to fix
> > > 2) it install everything from drobilla.net
> > > 2bis) that imply it have f. dependencies:
> > > 
> > > RDEPEND="!<media-libs/raul-9999
> > > 
> > > 	!<x11-libs/flowcanvas-9999
> > > 	!<dev-libs/serd-9999
> > > 	!<dev-libs/sord-9999
> > > 	!<meida-libs/suil-9999
> > > 	!<media-libs/ratom-9999
> > > 	!<media-libs/lilv-9999
> > > 	!<media-sound/ingen-9999
> > > 	!<media-sound/jalv-9999
> > > 	!<media-sound/omins-9999
> > > 	
> > >         ...
> > > 
> > > I see 2 issues.
> > > 
> > > First, I don't know what name I should give to this ebuild. I
> > > name it patchage in this mail.
> > > 
> > > Second, with such depends, we can make all those live ebuilds to
> > > only rdepend on patchage. The advantage is that new users will
> > > get their favourite software installed, and everything else from
> > > drobilla at the same time.
> > > 
> > > But they (the depends) are not optimal from portage POV. If the
> > > user already have some of those softwares installed, a manual
> > > unmerge would be necessary.
> > > 
> > > To change them to =package-9999 will not solve this issue, and
> > > possibly add circular depends. But I didn't tested it.
> > > 
> > > A third way would be to change all the !<package-9999
> > > into !package and remove all those live ebuilds from the tree. The
> > > advantage is simplicity, but non aware users will not like it,
> > > because they will not find the other drobilla programs. We can
> > > add a few words about this into the wiki and into 00-OVERLAY-INFO.
> > 
> > I followed that way. And I named it drobilla-9999. I made no other
> > change at that time, so you can test it and we can decide later
> > what we do with the other ebuilds. Anyway, all of them are
> > failing... So, I would suggest the simplest thing: just remove them.
> > 
> > > On more way would be to make like with the non-suite, ebuilds that
> > > install everything but install only the corresponding parts. It is
> > > much more work and maintenance. So, I will not do that.
> > 
> > If someone will do that, it is OK for me. Just do it.
> > 
> > > What do you think?
> 
> When I first emerge ingen from the overlay I had to do some edits to
> work, hence my commits to ingen and related software after that. I
> did think about snapshots because those repo change often and I
> really liked ingen. Then I read a mail with David Robillard saying
> that he considers ingen not ready yet and he would prefer them not to
> be packaged, so I stopped updating them. This was some time ago so
> maybe this has changed now. The last time I touched them was purely
> to match categories by portage when they landed there.
> 
> WBR
> Gavin
> 
> 

I suppose than, when ingen will be ready for packaging, David will make
a release. Live ebuilds are not for release code but for development
code. 

Also, a reason why I did a monolithic ebuild is that a lot of things
changed, and among them, flowcanvas changed its name. Another one is
that the build system is made to install all in one shot. I don't
have much time, so this monolithic ebuild was the only viable solution
for me. But again, if someone want to make separated ebuilds, I am OK
with it. We have now a working ebuild, and it will be easy to copy and
modify it to make those ebuilds. But on the long run, we will have
several ebuilds to maintain instead of one.

From the user perspective, the only real pro of separated ebuilds is
he/she will be able to install only what he/she really want, and spare
space on the hdd. The only real pro of a monolithic ebuild is one
compilation, which spare time, energy and the life of the hard-disk.

Ciao,
Dominique

-- 
"We have the heroes we deserve."