Bugzilla Bug 196945

Here is the ebuild for flashrom, a program used to flash bios (by linuxbios).

I didn't find any ebuild for it yet so i made one.It installs the latest svn
version.

flashrom-scm.ebuild
-------------------
# Copyright 1999-2006 Gentoo Foundation
# Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2
# $Header: $

#
# flashrom SVN ebuild
#

inherit subversion eutils

DESCRIPTION="Flash rom chips"
HOMEPAGE="http://linuxbios.org"

LICENSE="GPL"
SLOT="0"
KEYWORDS="~x86"
IUSE=""

SRC_URI=""
ESVN_REPO_URI="svn://linuxbios.org/repos/trunk/util/${PN}"

RDEPEND="sys-apps/pciutils
        sys-libs/zlib"

S=${WORKDIR}/${PN}

pkg_setup() {
        ewarn
        ewarn "WARNING: This is a live SVN build!!!"
        ewarn
}

src_install() {
#       not using emake, because it makes sandbox violations
        dosbin flashrom
        doman *.8
}

pkg_postinst() {
        einfo
        einfo "Flashrom is now installed."
        einfo
}

Please don't paste ebuilds inline. Also, pkg_{setup,postinst} is plain
redundant.

Created an attachment (id=134274) [details]
sys-fs/flashrom-scm.ebuild

I cleaned the ebuild and here it is as attachement.   

Sory to paste the code in the post above.

Created an attachment (id=135388) [details]
flashrom-9999.ebuild

Changed the ebuild a bit, now it compiles (at least here ;).

BTW whats the -scm in the previous ebuild name?

(In reply to comment #3)
> 
> BTW whats the -scm in the previous ebuild name?
> 
Sorry, i just gave my ebuilds. I use paludis and it has nice additional -scm
ending that can be used for "live ebuilds" (the ones that get sources directly
from svn, git, cvs ...)

Thanks for correcting this. I forgot portage doesn't have this.

I've tested it on amd64 and flashrom -r <image> works. Should it be enough to
keyword it as ~amd64?

Created an attachment (id=137300) [details]
fixed ebuild

added ~amd64 keyword
fixed homepage
cleaned useless comment

still not good enough for the portage tree?

Some issues need to be resolved:
- Improve the description to be a little more.. descriptive (yet below 80
chars)
- quote instance(s) of ${S}
- dodoc README

- instead of dobin'ing, fix the Makefile.

for moving this into the tree:
- make an actual snapshot of the repository and use that.

(In reply to comment #8)
> Some issues need to be resolved:
> - Improve the description to be a little more.. descriptive (yet below 80
> chars)
> - quote instance(s) of ${S}
> - dodoc README
> 
> - instead of dobin'ing, fix the Makefile.
> 
> for moving this into the tree:
> - make an actual snapshot of the repository and use that.

There's a 1.0 release on the way...
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bios/35465/match=flashrom+1.0

Best regards

Peter K

(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Some issues need to be resolved:
> > - Improve the description to be a little more.. descriptive (yet below 80
> > chars)
> > - quote instance(s) of ${S}
> > - dodoc README
> > 
> > - instead of dobin'ing, fix the Makefile.
> > 
> > for moving this into the tree:
> > - make an actual snapshot of the repository and use that.
> 
> There's a 1.0 release on the way...
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bios/35465/match=flashrom+1.0
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Peter K
> 

i will wait for this official releases and remake the ebuilds.  I have some
already waiting (based on debian tarballs), but the official seem better.

Created an attachment (id=179403) [details]
flashrom-9999.ebuild - new web page, new repository svn

Created an attachment (id=179441) [details]
flashrom-9999.ebuild

Created an attachment (id=179442) [details]
Makefile.patch

Created an attachment (id=190324) [details]
Updated patch for the Makefile

Corrected for changes in the upstream version and for linking

Created an attachment (id=190325) [details]
Corrected ebuild

Fixed unmatched quotes. By the way, is EAPI=2 really necessary here? I do not
see any need, actually EAPI=0 should seemingly suffice.

Created an attachment (id=190387) [details]
Updated

Readded ~x86 keyword and fixed description.

Taking this. sys-apps/ sounds more appropriate to me

flashrom-0.9.0 was released yesterday. This is the first actual tarball
release.
It is not called 1.0 yet mostly because some of the short argument letters will
probably change and swap around.
sys-apps/flashrom-0.9.0 added to tree, no live ebuild considered for tree
anymore with actual releases happening.

Actually sys-boot might be better. Suggested by idl0r. The program raincoat is
in there, it does the same thing, but was written for xbox-linux so only
supports a few flash chips.

The ebuild which went to the portage has a typo in the homepage URL.
The final slash shoudn't be there.

Maybe raincoat is in the wrong category instead? One package isn't that much of
a metric.
Fixed homepage, whoops, thanks