Created attachment 408228 [details] stress-ng-0.04.14.ebuild stress-ng will stress test a computer system in various selectable ways. It was designed to exercise various physical subsystems of a computer as well as the various operating system kernel interfaces. Stress-ng features: - over 90 stress tests - over 50 CPU specific stress tests that exercise floating point, integer, bit manipulation and control flow - over 20 virtual memory stress tests
Created attachment 408230 [details, diff] stress-ng-keyctl.patch
Tomáš do you intend to proxy maintain this ebuild ? If not I would like to offer to proxy maintain it.
Brendan, feel free to maintain it, please report back to close this bug afterwards. Thanks!
Thanks Tomáš!
Created attachment 424514 [details] stress-ng-0.05.12.ebuild Attached new ebuild for 0.05.12 version. * Patch is no longer needed * Updated DEPEND
Created attachment 424516 [details] metadata.xml Created metadata.xml
@Brendan - change the copyright year to 2016 - use EAPI 6 - mark x86 testing
(In reply to Tomáš Mózes from comment #7) > @Brendan > - change the copyright year to 2016 > - use EAPI 6 I haven't looked into the rest, but EAPI 5 is perfectly fine to use
Created attachment 424530 [details] stress-ng-0.05.12.ebuild - change the copyright year to 2016 -- Done - use EAPI 6 -- Sure - mark x86 testing -- woops , thanks :)
(In reply to Kristian Fiskerstrand from comment #8) > (In reply to Tomáš Mózes from comment #7) > > @Brendan > > - change the copyright year to 2016 > > - use EAPI 6 > > I haven't looked into the rest, but EAPI 5 is perfectly fine to use Is there a drawback in using the newest EAPI (especially if it's a new package)?
(In reply to Tomáš Mózes from comment #10) > (In reply to Kristian Fiskerstrand from comment #8) > > (In reply to Tomáš Mózes from comment #7) > > > @Brendan > > > - change the copyright year to 2016 > > > - use EAPI 6 > > > > I haven't looked into the rest, but EAPI 5 is perfectly fine to use > > Is there a drawback in using the newest EAPI (especially if it's a new > package)? Not really; it will be masked by missing EAPI until users have upgraded the portage version to one supporting it. The ebuild in question is very simple one, the point was more generic in that current EAPI 5 ebuilds doesn't have to be actively rewritten, in this case doing so likely makes sense.
(In reply to Kristian Fiskerstrand from comment #11) > > Is there a drawback in using the newest EAPI (especially if it's a new > > package)? > > Not really; it will be masked by missing EAPI until users have upgraded the > portage version to one supporting it. > > The ebuild in question is very simple one, the point was more generic in > that current EAPI 5 ebuilds doesn't have to be actively rewritten, in this > case doing so likely makes sense. Yes, I see your point. However, this is a new package that will go into testing anyway. And a portage that supports EAPI=6 is already in the tree, so I don't see a problem there. Anyway, thanks for the input Kristian.
commit 2b3957b159e81b5af50c839382893a4ac8837c25 Author: Ian Delaney <idella4@gentoo.org> Date: Thu Feb 4 14:02:57 2016 +0800 app-benchmarks/stress-ng: new ebuild sourced form the maintiane-wanted list proxy maintainer is Brendan Horan, sourced fron the gentoo bug Fixes the bug Gentoo bug: #556620