Hi, this a new Ebuild for the "color editor: syntax coloring for eclipse". The programm has is own Licence (http://gstaff.org/colorEditor/download.html#license) ...seems to be GPL style but I think there will be a need for a new licence file. kai
Created attachment 30939 [details] eclipse-cgb-editor-0.3.1.ebuild
Karl - interested?
Daniel: If it's eclipse, always;) Kai: I'm giving priority to submissions for plugins that build entirely from source code. Binary-only packages like this one will need to be installed in /opt, as you do in the ebuild. However, the current eclipse-sdk-3.0.0_pre8 ebuild, which properly compiles from source code, is installed in /usr/lib/eclipse, so we cannot, by Gentoo path policies, install the binary-only ebuilds directly into /usr/lib. I'd ideally like Eclipse to first search $HOME/.eclipse/plugins/, then /usr/lib/eclipse/, then search /opt/eclipse-${SLOT} for available plugins. However, I'm not at the stage where this is possible yet. If you want this (or any other plugin) to be at the forefront of my acceptance queue, it will have to be a complete from-source ebuild. It's not that I don't accept binary-only stuff, but as we're primarily a from-source shop, and we think open source is a good idea and all that, we generally give priority to from-source ebuilds;)
Hi, I totally agree, to compile from source is always the better solution. But what I don't understand is your comment about eclipse in /usr/lib/...? On my machine I have this path: /opt/eclipse-sdk-3.0_rc8/eclipse with the package dev-util/eclipse-sdk. However, I will try to bring in source Ebuilds in the future :) kai
I am sorry for the confusions created by the _rc8 ebuild. The Gentoo policy is that all packages that build from source code should go into /usr/, while binary-only packages should go into /opt. The _rc8 ebuild erroneously did not do a complete build of all the source code and thus had to be placed into /opt. This is also why we tried to keep the 3.0.x series hard-masked. The _pre8 and _pre8-r1 compile everything from source code and is installed into /usr/lib/eclipse-3. As for this very ebuild, I notice that does indeed have the source code bundled, as editorsrc.zip. That bundle does not contain any build scripts, and neither does the cbg.editor_0.3.1.zip itself, so building it may prove troublesome. Perhaps you can fire off an e-mail to the maintainer and ask for a proper ant buildscript?
There are a few issues with this ebuild: 0) since you don't do any patching in src_unpack, you can remove it entirely, unpacking ${A} into ${S} is handled automatically for you. 1) dodir /opt/eclipse-sdk-3.0*/plugins makes no sense. dodir will create a directory inside ${D} (typically (/var/tmp/portage/<package-name>/image/), hence there are no directories to match the * against. 2) the cp line commits the same mistake. 3) I think we'll end up installing all binary-only plugins into into /opt/eclipse-plugins-3/ Any luck on getting the builds scripts from the author, or generating new builds scripts using eclipse?
I've packages this. I've created a new tar.bz2 file containing only the source code and a build script for ant. I've tested it only against eclipse-sdk-3.0.0_rc1 (and also the RC1 binary drop from eclipse.org). It appears to work in both cases, but I'd like more testing before unmasking.
