On every bump I get messages from: elog elog "Some web pages may require additional fonts to display properly." elog "Try installing some of the following packages if some characters" elog "are not displayed properly:" elog " - media-fonts/arphicfonts" elog " - media-fonts/bitstream-cyberbit" elog " - media-fonts/droid" elog " - media-fonts/ipamonafont" elog " - media-fonts/ja-ipafonts" elog " - media-fonts/takao-fonts" elog " - media-fonts/wqy-microhei" elog " - media-fonts/wqy-zenhei" I think readme.gentoo.eclass could be used for these messages, I can do the work if you want Thanks
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #0) > I think readme.gentoo.eclass could be used for these messages, I can do the > work if you want Sounds good - could you post patches for review by our team?
I see this is a bit special case: chromium.eclass only sets pkg_postinst phase but not src_install This is problematic since readme.gentoo_create_doc is usually called from src_install. Is "dodoc" allowed from pkg_preinst?
We can remove the messaging/logic from pkg_postinst and just install the readme file from src_install in the ebuild.
Tell me the way you prefer, I don't have any preference for either one :( The only problematic part is the dodoc call, as DOC_CONTENTS and print message can be shared in the eclass if wanted
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #4) > Tell me the way you prefer, I don't have any preference for either one :( Just give us something to work with. I think we may end up dropping the exported phase functions from chromium.eclass at some point, so it will need adjustment either way.
This is what would be needed: 1. Set: DISABLE_AUTOFORMATTING="yes" -> to allow you to play with formatting (in this case is preferred due the marks for each line" 2. Set DOC_CONTENTS to: Some web pages may require additional fonts to display properly... 3. Above can be set at global scope or at any time before calling readme.gentoo_create_doc 4. Call readme.gentoo_create_doc before running readme.gentoo_print_elog 5. Call readme.gentoo_print_elog from pkg_postinst
Note that v8 ebuild currently use chromium.eclass, but given that we're transitioning away from shared v8 (at least for now) this will soon solve itself. I'm fine with moving things around as compared to where they currently are to better fit readme.gentoo.eclass model. Pacho, could you post some patches (either to the eclass, chromium ebuild, or both), which would give us something specific to discuss? So far what you said here sounds good to me.
I think the easiest would be to move to ebuilds, otherwise, should I put the create part in ebuild and rely in eclass for the rest? (DOC_CONTENTS variable and print elog message?) -> that looks more error prone to me :( Also, if we go to moving it to ebuilds, should I move all the elog stuff? (even the one not using readme.gentoo.eclass), or will eclass functions be kept for other cases?
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #8) > I think the easiest would be to move to ebuilds, otherwise, should I put the > create part in ebuild and rely in eclass for the rest? (DOC_CONTENTS > variable and print elog message?) -> that looks more error prone to me :( > > Also, if we go to moving it to ebuilds, should I move all the elog stuff? > (even the one not using readme.gentoo.eclass), or will eclass functions be > kept for other cases? Yeah, let's just move all of it (including elog messages) to the ebuild.
Created attachment 360518 [details, diff] 1.patch Patch for google-chrome:stable I have dropped the PepperFlash note as that only informs about the usual method to play with plugins... but usually people shouldn't do that (well, I think most people will prefer PepperFlash over old flashplugin) If you want to keep it, you can put the line in DOC_CONTENTS too
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #10) > Created attachment 360518 [details, diff] [details, diff] > 1.patch > > Patch for google-chrome:stable > > I have dropped the PepperFlash note as that only informs about the usual > method to play with plugins... but usually people shouldn't do that (well, I > think most people will prefer PepperFlash over old flashplugin) If you want > to keep it, you can put the line in DOC_CONTENTS too Thanks. I'd prefer to move everything to DOC_CONTENTS, including the messages about DE themes. I'd also prefer to keep the note about PepperFlash. I'll let Mike decide for google-chrome, I'd be happy to take a very similar (with above notes) patch for www-client/chromium.
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #10) Committed with phajdan's suggestions. http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/www-client/google-chrome/google-chrome-30.0.1599.101_p1.ebuild?r1=1.1&r2=1.2
Created attachment 361254 [details, diff] Patch for chromium
Looks ok to me
23 Oct 2013; Pawel Hajdan jr -chromium-32.0.1664.3-r1.ebuild, +chromium-32.0.1678.0.ebuild: Dev channel bump. Use readme.gentoo eclass (bug #487136 by pacho; patch by floppym based on pacho's original patch). Remove old.
