A new version of surfraw was released. Changelog can be found here: http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/s/surfraw/surfraw_2.1.6/changelog
Created attachment 130082 [details] surfraw-2.1.6.ebuild
Created attachment 130084 [details, diff] surfraw-2.1.6-gentoo_pkg_tools.patch
James, if you bless this, I'll check it in.
Seemant, I wasn't even aware of this bug :/ There are some problems straight off the bat, some I've mentioned to you privately but should be out in the open. The most important being that the 2.1.6 release, and all the others that have followed, require an enormous number of new packages for the opensearch functionality. Many of which are not in portage. Should a bump happen at this point it pretty much requires RESTRICT=test too, as the tests require a network connection and are very likely to fail through simple server errors. Which I feel I must point out are not the fault of Ian, who wrote them, but just the nature of a testsuite that hits numerous remote servers. For what it's worth, the new home page is also http://surfraw.alioth.debian.org although the current one is also valid. It isn't clear to me why attachment #130082 [details] changes this. I had a patch accepted upstream that allows for the conditional support of opensearch[1], and maybe it would just make sense at this point to push a new version in with opensearch disabled and a einfo explaining the situation. Unfortunately, I currently have neither the time nor inclination to chase the new perl dependencies for this(although I can probably open up my overlay that contains most of the dependencies packaged as of their July versions should anyone want a stating point). Thanks, James 1. My aim with the patch was for USE=opensearch, and not to simply remove it.
* James Rowe (jnrowe@ukfsn.org) wrote: > I had a patch accepted upstream that allows for the conditional > support of opensearch[1], and maybe it would just make sense at this > point to push a new version in with opensearch disabled and a einfo > explaining the situation. Well, to get things going I'm throwing up a patch that bumps with OpenSearch and tests disabled. I've added an explanation for the tests being skipped, but haven't decided how the disabling of OpenSearch should be described. I don't really want /even more/ informational text, but it does need a comment around the econf call. Comments/flames @ me. Note that it can, and does, use the 2.1.5 gentoo_pkg_tools patch. And, also that I don't have the perms to change the summary now that we're talking 2.2.0.
Created attachment 133290 [details, diff] surfraw-2.2.0-version_bump.patch
Seemant, Is there any good reason why the opensearch disabled version couldn't be checked in? I've been grep'ing --disable- through the tree this morning, and it wouldn't be the first package that is disabling some small functionality in favour of a stack o' deps. If it isn't a problem I'd suggest going with that "solution", albeit with a comment above the econf line explaining the situation.
seemant retired
Version 2.2.2 is in the tree. I also cleaned up the package directory a bit and took up maintainership. :)
