Bug List: (This bug is not in your last search results)   Show last search results      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 214229
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Daniel Black <dragonheart@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Auke Booij (tulcod) <auke.booij@gmail.com>
Add CC:
CC:
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 214229 depends on: 197552 Show dependency tree
Bug 214229 blocks:
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)


Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.






View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug


Description:   Opened: 2008-03-22 10:23 0000
lmbench 3.0 has been released (ages ago). Please bump this ebuild to 3.0

I tried doing this, the first problem was that you have to set MY_P to
lmbench3. I don't know the most elegant solution to do this.
And even then, there are some modifications in the makefile, so those need to
be sorted out too.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:

------- Comment #1 From Daniel Black 2008-04-01 14:24:07 0000 -------
name the ebuild lmbench-3.ebuild
set MY_P to ${PN}${PV}

if you have a working ebuild that would be great. Feel free to ask for help on
#gentoo-dev-help on the freenode irc network.

------- Comment #2 From Daniel Black 2008-05-03 01:04:15 0000 -------
added - let me know if you have problems with it.

------- Comment #3 From Auke Booij (tulcod) 2008-05-15 16:07:32 0000 -------
Thanks daniel, it works fine. But shouldn't the version in portage be named
3.0, as opposed to just 3?

------- Comment #4 From Daniel Black 2008-05-15 18:06:32 0000 -------
upstream authors called it version 3 so i'll call it the same
http://www.bitmover.com/lmbench/get_lmbench.html

------- Comment #5 From Auke Booij (tulcod) 2008-05-15 18:30:42 0000 -------
Hm, I get your point. However, how to deal with the alpha package then? Should
that be removed or what? Cause that one gets preferred right now. Maybe rename
to lmbench-3_alpha3?

------- Comment #6 From Daniel Black 2008-05-16 23:36:51 0000 -------
your quite right with the ordering of which is latest.
options:
1. make 3 stable in 15 days or so and remove the old one?
2. some funny numbering thing

i'm keen on option 1.

------- Comment #7 From Auke Booij (tulcod) 2008-05-17 10:21:54 0000 -------
well, the funny numbering thing could be funny and exciting too. so why not :P
btw, can't 3.0_alpha3 be renamed to 3_alpha3?
if not, then wait a few days (might not be needed imo, but i guess that's just
standard procedure) and remove the alpha version.

------- Comment #8 From Daniel Black 2008-05-17 11:02:06 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> well, the funny numbering thing could be funny and exciting too. so why not :P
> btw, can't 3.0_alpha3 be renamed to 3_alpha3?

quite right - done. Bit ugly as those update from 3.0_alpha3 to 3_alpha3 but I
can live with that.

Thanks

Bug List: (This bug is not in your last search results)   Show last search results      Search page      Enter new bug