Bug 35950 – dev-lang/logo++-0.0.1b.ebuild (New Package)

• Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Josh Glover (RETIRED) 2003-12-16 09:14:14 UTC]

I have attached an ebuild for Logo++, which is a  Logo-like interpreter. The homepage is: 

http://clpp.sourceforge.net/

I suggest that it be placed in dev-lang/logo++. There are no dependencies of which I am aware.

Cheers,
Josh

[Comment 1 Josh Glover (RETIRED) 2003-12-16 09:14:44 UTC]

Created attachment 22304 [details]
dev-lang/logo++-0.0.1b.ebuild (New Package)

[Comment 2 Chaker Nakhli 2003-12-16 16:59:17 UTC]

Created attachment 22325 [details]
Add Logo++ dependency

Logo++ depends on fltk 1.0.11 (it won't work with newer versions) and on the
flex library (needs -lfl option for linking). I am new to ebuild files, but I
would modify it that way :


DEPEND="=x11-libs/fltk-1.0.11
	 sys-devel=flex"

is it ok ?

--chaker

[Comment 3 Josh Glover (RETIRED) 2003-12-17 06:51:51 UTC]

Created attachment 22345 [details]
dev-lang/logo++-0.0.1b-r2.ebuild (Update)

I added the Flex and fltk dependencies, as the author suggested. However, I
compiled and ran Logo++ without fltk, so is it really a dependency?

The dependencies section now looks like this:

DEPEND="sys-devel/flex
	=x11-libs/fltk-1.0.11*"

The star is necessary, as the fltk-1.0.11 ebuild in Portage is -r3, so
=x11-libs/fltk-1.0.11 would not work. That seems like a bit of a hack, but...

[Comment 4 Josh Glover (RETIRED) 2003-12-17 06:54:18 UTC]

Chaker,

Please Edit your attachment ("Add Logo++ dependency") and mark it as obsolete. My -r2 ebuild handles the dependencies you pointed out.

[Comment 5 Josh Glover (RETIRED) 2006-02-22 20:34:51 UTC]

Taking this bug. The project looks pretty stalled, but no reason the release should not be in Portage, as SourceForge is hosting it.

[Comment 6 Josh Glover (RETIRED) 2006-02-22 20:35:44 UTC]

Argh! Why does "Accept this Bug" not reassign it to me? Why must I go through two steps!?

[Comment 7 Josh Glover (RETIRED) 2007-06-23 06:00:05 UTC]

This ebuild is ancient, the project is not being developed, and it does not compile. No need for this in Portage, methinks.