194031 2007-09-27 18:53 0000 Please keyword =dev-libs/xmlrpc-c-1.06.09 for cmake-2.4.7-r2 2009-04-27 01:14:20 0000 1 1 1 Unclassified Gentoo Linux Ebuilds 2007.0 All Linux RESOLVED FIXED KEYWORDREQ P2 normal --- 205633 1 philantrop@gentoo.org mips@gentoo.org endgame.dos@gmail.com philantrop@gentoo.org philantrop@gentoo.org 2007-09-27 18:53:08 0000 dev-util/cmake-2.4.7-r2 (currently p.masked) depends on >=dev-libs/xmlrpc-c-1.06.03 now. Until -r1 the bundled xmlrpc-c (and lots of other bundled stuff) was used. As xmlrpc-c obviously built on your arches before as a part of cmake, keywording this should not be a big deal. :-) philantrop@gentoo.org 2007-10-01 13:51:44 0000 cf. comment #1. Actually CC'ing arches probably helps a lot... :) uberlord@gentoo.org 2007-10-01 15:04:35 0000 If newer cmake requires xmlrpc-c, why does xmlrpc-c-1.10 require cmake to build? That's a big chicken and egg isn't it? This is obviously a problem for users who don't currently have cmake installed. philantrop@gentoo.org 2007-10-01 15:33:52 0000 (In reply to comment #2) > If newer cmake requires xmlrpc-c, why does xmlrpc-c-1.10 require cmake to > build? That's a big chicken and egg isn't it? Not really as 1.10.0 is p.masked, doesn't have the necessary DEPEND on cmake so that it wouldn't install anyway for users without cmake (which if, of course, a bug) and it doesn't even need cmake as it is autotools-based as per upstream. Even the newer 1.11.0 (the last version released as tarball) has no official cmake support nor has current SVN (which is the new "release method"... *sigh*) at the time of writing (and the code has last changed only 4 days ago). I consider 1.10's "experimental cmake patch" a dead end. To better reflect this, I've updated the summary and I'm CC'ing xmlrpc-c's maintainer. Benedikt, do we need 1.10 in its current form for anything? It's been p.masked for more than four months. jer@gentoo.org 2007-10-01 17:06:58 0000 I think it's better to specify an exact version in the Summary: the target appears to be =dev-libs/xmlrpc-c-1.06.03 or _preferably_ =dev-libs/xmlrpc-c-1.06.09 uberlord@gentoo.org 2007-10-01 17:20:03 0000 bsd done jer@gentoo.org 2007-10-02 05:20:28 0000 Marked ~hppa. endgame.dos@gmail.com 2007-10-03 11:36:35 0000 (In reply to comment #2) > If newer cmake requires xmlrpc-c, why does xmlrpc-c-1.10 require cmake to > build? That's a big chicken and egg isn't it? > > This is obviously a problem for users who don't currently have cmake installed. > Suggestion: If a CMake buildsystem for xmlrpc-c becomes the only option, add a USE=internal-libs or similar to dev-util/cmake. Make it build CMake using the internal supplied libs. I'm not sure about the best way to let the user know that they have to do a USE=internal-libs emerge -1 cmake && emerge cmake, though. armin76@gentoo.org 2007-10-06 15:38:55 0000 ~ia64/~sparc done corsair@gentoo.org 2007-10-14 15:24:01 0000 added ~ppc64 vapier@gentoo.org 2007-12-11 20:04:41 0000 ebuild issues: - pointless usage of arrays when a plain string will do fine (and could even be simplified beyond needing myconf at all) - no quoting of $D in src_install - not using emake in src_install - does this package really come with no files you can `dodoc` on ? hollow@gentoo.org 2007-12-11 20:14:10 0000 (In reply to comment #3) > Benedikt, do we need 1.10 in its current form for anything? It's been p.masked > for more than four months. Well, xmlrpc-c's build system is horribly broken, therefore i added the patch. But honestly, i have no interest in this crappy library anymore. the buildsystem sucks, the api is awful and with every new release it breaks even more. therefore i will update metadata to maintainer-wanted and mail -dev asap. philantrop@gentoo.org 2007-12-11 21:17:46 0000 (In reply to comment #11) > therefore i will update metadata to maintainer-wanted and mail -dev asap. No need to write that mail - just add me to metadata.xml, please. I'll take it. hollow@gentoo.org 2007-12-11 22:03:19 0000 done, thx. philantrop@gentoo.org 2007-12-13 06:53:58 0000 (In reply to comment #10) > ebuild issues: > - pointless usage of arrays when a plain string will do fine (and could even be > simplified beyond needing myconf at all) Well, this bug was not about 1.10.00 in the first place. :-) > - no quoting of $D in src_install > - not using emake in src_install > - does this package really come with no files you can `dodoc` on ? These issues have been fixed now. vapier@gentoo.org 2008-01-13 00:47:16 0000 sorry for the delay ... i did test but forgot to actually commit keywords btw, it seems -O3 gets forced into the build irregardless of user's flags ... you may want to fix that ;) philantrop@gentoo.org 2008-01-13 15:17:41 0000 Fixed. Thanks, vapier! :-) mips, I'm dropping your keyword on cmake-2.4.7-r2 and will file a new bug for re-keywording. loki_val@gentoo.org 2009-04-27 01:14:20 0000 xmlrpc-c-1.16.06 has ~mips keywords.