>>> Source unpacked. >>> Compiling source in /var/tmp/portage/dev-perl/MailTools-1.74.0.1 ... /var/tmp/portage/dev-perl/MailTools-1.74.0.1 * No Make or Build file detected... >>> Source compiled. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: emerge dev-perl/MailTools Actual Results: no build, no files installed
Sorry, it was my own fault :( I had copied and modified the ebuild to make it depend on >=virtual/perl-libnet-1.19 instead of >=virtual/perl-libnet-1.0703, because paludis consideres the latter to be a bigger version number while portage does not. Should have named it ...-rSomething because perl-module.eclass relies on the version number to be the same as in then source dir after unpacking. Nevertheless I think the compilation part should fail if there is no Make or Build file, so I will leave the bug as NEW for now.
except there are rare cases where there won't be a makefile.pl or build.pl - but we still want to use the eclass (which is why i didn't die at that point in the eclass). the thinking was of a module that wasn't quite packaged right could still do a skeleton ebuild and install...but maybe that was a silly thought. other perl devs?
I think it's ok the way we handle it atm.
closing up per OP
