Bugzilla Bug 101604

Read the ChangeLog.  Tons of new stuff, lots of fixes.

Created an attachment (id=65274) [edit]
conky-1.2.ebuild

ebuild, tested on amd64, x86, and ppc

Created an attachment (id=65276) [edit]
conky-1.2.ebuild

Ooops...already screwed up.  Changed ebuild to use sf.net mirrors.

So sorry...there was a tiny bug in the build.  I updated the files about 2 mins
before writing this comment.  There had been 0 downloads to I figured I was
safe.  Again, sorry if this caused any trouble.  I'll let the rest of any bugs
wait...

k - assuming the right digest is as follows:  
MD5 ac197caa27914f4c47e24d5bdf8510e8 conky-1.2.tar.bz2 132171  
  
if not just note here and I'll fix it.  
  
Added conky 1.2. Keep up the good work Brenden.  
  
One thing with your ebuilds - I'm not keen on adding use flags unless there is  
a fundamental change to behaviour or dependencies.. As such I've dropped a  
couple of use flags and just enabled the options. If you substancially 
disagree with this just tell me.  

(In reply to comment #4)
> One thing with your ebuilds - I'm not keen on adding use flags unless there is  
> a fundamental change to behaviour or dependencies.. As such I've dropped a  
> couple of use flags and just enabled the options. If you substancially 
> disagree with this just tell me.  

This isn't a problem.  I added them, as per our discussion in bug 96750

On another note, a lot of people have been nagging me for a CVS ebuild, and
there is one available from Conky's CVS
(http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/conky/conky/app-admin/conky/conky-1.9999.ebuild?rev=1.3&view=log).
 Is there any chance of this ever getting into portage?  I know e17 managed to
get CVS ebuilds into portage, but there is probably more demand for those.

I'm not keen on a cvs ebuild at this stage. Feel free to offer one on your web 
site that fits into an overlay. 
 
I've only every added one cvs ebuild (sdcc) and that was because the compile 
method stayed constant for a year. 

The dependency test for amd64 is not correct when using metar flag. If mdsplib
is not already emerged. portage does not test for mdsplib and therefore emerge
failed.

I supposed test was added this way because mdsplib is x86 only up to now. But
even if not available, portage should still test dependency the same way. If
mdsplib does not exist on the current architecture, portage should failed the
emerge, not skip the dependency.