Summary: | media-libs/x264 : please review prefix changes / restore accidentally dropped code | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo/Alt | Reporter: | Robert Blenkinsopp (XenoPhoenix) <robert> |
Component: | Prefix Support | Assignee: | Gentoo Media-video project <media-video> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | enhancement | CC: | junghans, nikoli, prefix |
Priority: | High | Keywords: | Inclusion, PATCH |
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | AMD64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 315803 | ||
Attachments: | patch for x264-0.0.20120707.ebuild |
Description
Robert Blenkinsopp (XenoPhoenix)
2011-01-09 16:22:22 UTC
Ping. the lastest version (0.0.20100605) of x264 in prefix tree has patches for solaris and OSX. Could somebody with these OSes test and forward port the patch to version 0.0.20120327 (BTW, that version is already keyworded ~x86-linux in gx86 :O )? (In reply to comment #1) > Ping. the lastest version (0.0.20100605) of x264 in prefix tree has patches > for solaris and OSX. Could somebody with these OSes test and forward port > the patch to version 0.0.20120327 (BTW, that version is already keyworded > ~x86-linux in gx86 :O )? x264-0.0.20120707 in gx86 has prefix keywords. (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Ping. the lastest version (0.0.20100605) of x264 in prefix tree has patches > > for solaris and OSX. Could somebody with these OSes test and forward port > > the patch to version 0.0.20120327 (BTW, that version is already keyworded > > ~x86-linux in gx86 :O )? > > x264-0.0.20120707 in gx86 has prefix keywords. So? We see it all the time, that the Gentoo Linux maintainers are "too helpful" - the diff is large, something needs fixing... Created attachment 322216 [details, diff]
patch for x264-0.0.20120707.ebuild
Differences between prefix-overlay and gx86 are mainly minor.
Prefix support was added by lu_zero at Sept. 1. Keywords added by me. Christoph, actually keywords were removed by you in this commit: http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/media-libs/x264/x264-0.0.20120707.ebuild?r1=1.3&r2=1.4 Commit message tells "added prefix keywords (bug #351219)", but diff has only '~x86-freebsd ~sparc-solaris ~x86-solaris' keywords and several yasm deps removed, nothing was added. Solaris related workarounds are still in x264-0.0.20120327.ebuild, but now it has no solaris related keywords. So what and why you tried to do in this commit? Now i am updating x264 packages in multimedia overlay, i need to know what to do with solaris. Also what about returning this changes to build system upstream? Having a lot workarounds in src_prepare and checking them during every version bump is not fun. (In reply to Christoph Junghans from comment #5) > Prefix support was added by lu_zero at Sept. 1. > > Keywords added by me. (In reply to Nikoli from comment #6) > Christoph, actually keywords were removed by you in this commit: > http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/media-libs/x264/x264- > 0.0.20120707.ebuild?r1=1.3&r2=1.4 > > Commit message tells "added prefix keywords (bug #351219)", but diff has > only '~x86-freebsd ~sparc-solaris ~x86-solaris' keywords and several yasm > deps removed, nothing was added. Solaris related workarounds are still in > x264-0.0.20120327.ebuild, but now it has no solaris related keywords. > So what and why you tried to do in this commit? > > Now i am updating x264 packages in multimedia overlay, i need to know what > to do with solaris. > > Also what about returning this changes to build system upstream? Having a > lot workarounds in src_prepare and checking them during every version bump > is not fun. Christoph, PING! About macos workaround, for current git master 'sed -i -e "s|-arch x86_64||g" configure' does this: if [ "$SYS" = MACOSX ]; then ASFLAGS="$ASFLAGS -f macho64 -m amd64 -DPIC -DPREFIX" - if cc_check '' "-arch x86_64"; then - CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -arch x86_64" - LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS -arch x86_64" + if cc_check '' ""; then + CFLAGS="$CFLAGS " + LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS " fi I think it is not safe and also does pointless things, patch should be used instead for removing 'if cc_check '' "-arch x86_64"; then'. Also what upstream tells about it? + 01 Aug 2013; Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> x264-9999.ebuild, + +files/x264-cflags.patch: + Do not mess too much with CFLAGS. Should fix bug #413661 and bug #351219. + please test and reopen if it still fails |