First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 217240
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: DUPLICATE of bug 149764
Assigned To: Gentoo Linux bug wranglers <bug-wranglers@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@gmail.com>
Add CC:
CC:
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
frobtads-0.10.ebuild frobtads-0.10.ebuild text/plain Nikos Chantziaras 2008-04-11 00:19 0000 1.01 KB Details
TADS TADS 3 Freeware Source Code License text/plain Nikos Chantziaras 2008-04-11 00:21 0000 2.17 KB Details
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 217240 depends on: Show dependency tree
Bug 217240 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: 2008-04-11 00:15 0000
Ahoy.

The attached frobtads-0.10.ebuild is an upstream update to bug 149764 as well
as a fix to the ebuild provided there (uses egamesconf now, and only uses
-fno-strict-aliasing for CXXFLAGS).

In the ebuild, you will see that I'm accessing CXXFLAGS directly; this is
because "append-flags" does not allow for appending only to CXXFLAGS, and I did
not find any other way to do it other than appending directly to CXXFLAGS.

Following Gentoo guidelines, I only used KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86" since I only
tested on those Gentoo versions.  However, the package itself is supposed to
compile and run on all Gentoo ports, no matter what the architecture or
operating system is.

Furthermore, it obsoletes the ebuilds in bug 73947 and they should *not* be
committed (the project is dead and this one is its continuation).

I don't know if this should have been tagged as New Package rather than Update
since the previous ebuild has not been committed at all yet.

About the package:

"FrobTADS is a complete rewrite of the Unix console-version of TADS ("Text
Adventure Development System"). It uses curses (or ncurses) and provides an
interpreter to play games developed with TADS as well as the TADS 2 and 3
development tools. It adds support for a number of relatively recent user
interface features including full support for text and background colors, TADS
3 banner windows, and timed input."

In addition to the ebuild, I am also attaching the license.  This should
probably be /usr/portage/licenses/TADS.

Since this is an interpreter and development tool for games, I suppose the
right category is "games-engines".

The original ebuild (bug 149764) has been submitted on 2006-10-01.  That's a
long time. Will this package make it into portage?

------- Comment #1 From Nikos Chantziaras 2008-04-11 00:19:34 0000 -------
Created an attachment (id=149353) [details]
frobtads-0.10.ebuild

------- Comment #2 From Nikos Chantziaras 2008-04-11 00:21:33 0000 -------
Created an attachment (id=149355) [details]
TADS 3 Freeware Source Code License

The license of the package. This should eventually become
/usr/portage/licenses/TADS.

------- Comment #3 From Mark Loeser 2008-04-11 02:53:40 0000 -------
As you referenced the bug that this is a duplicate of...please post any updates
on that bug.

There is no guarantee that this package will make it into the tree.  A
developer will have to take responsibility for it.  If you want, you can
maintain it in our official user overlay
(http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/sunrise/).

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 149764 ***

------- Comment #4 From Nikos Chantziaras 2008-04-11 03:02:07 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> As you referenced the bug that this is a duplicate of...please post any updates
> on that bug.

I followed this guide before posting:
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/ebuild-submit.xml

It says to submit a new bug tagged with "(Update)" rather than posting in an
existing bug. I'm a bit confused about when to post "(Update)" tagged bugs and
when to reply to existing bugs.

------- Comment #5 From Kai 2008-04-11 23:31:25 0000 -------
Nikos, it looks like that documentation page was last updated in 2005,
unfortunately. Since it's clearly incorrect, best thing would be to submit a
bug for it.

------- Comment #6 From Nikos Chantziaras 2008-04-11 23:45:35 0000 -------
Gah, I wish someone commented on this sooner :P I've posted a new ebuild in a
new bug 217341 (for another package) rather than using the existing bug 66189.

So the current policy is to always post in existing bugs when submitting
ebuilds for new upstream versions?

First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug