standardized approach to CVS PKGBUILDS?

dtw · 2004-09-21 21:15:39

is there a possibility of a more standardized approach to CVS PKGBUILDS? or does it exist and i missed it?

i have seen lots of good ways of doing it but there are some things that might be better standardized. I know all CVS builds are submited by people who are really outside of formal standards but a recommended format would more than likely be followed if available.

the use of variables such as $cvsserver and $cvsmod(ule) are failry standard in many contributions.

i personally favour the use of a separate build dir to keep the cvs source clean. on the face this may seem unecessary (for some packages it is even recommended), "it wastes space" may be a quick argument, but most apps that don't have a configure are usually small enough that a duplicate of the source for building is minor. those apps with a config option can simply be built in another dir using that config option. as you are unlikely to build from the same source again (else why use cvs) this build dir can be deleted at the end of the process,

i would be keen to see the ideas of others

sarah31 · 2004-09-21 21:25:35

i suppose this would be a non-official discussion because the idea is to try and keep cvs out of the repos altogether unless that is the only way that source is distributed (openal was a cvs one i think).

cvs is particularily nasty to set standards as some projects are more active than others and so setting up fancy arrangements for building package from cvs is just a waste of time.

personally i would love it if all cvs packages were outside the official arch repos (including unstable and testing).

dtw · 2004-09-21 21:40:50

i understand your position and agree with both you and lavapunk (see here)

i was really talking about user submitted builds on the forum - maybe this is the wrong section of the boards to discuss it tho

tehdely · 2004-09-22 00:44:10

You may be interested in the makepkg changes I'm working on. I created an (experimental) cvs module to do exaclty this.

However, I decided I didn't like the approach I'm taking so I'm going for something more advanced (and transparent).

http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=6598

Arch Linux

#1 2004-09-21 21:15:39

standardized approach to CVS PKGBUILDS?

#2 2004-09-21 21:25:35

Re: standardized approach to CVS PKGBUILDS?

#3 2004-09-21 21:40:50

Re: standardized approach to CVS PKGBUILDS?

#4 2004-09-22 00:44:10

Re: standardized approach to CVS PKGBUILDS?

Board footer