it is a kernel module for software wifi switch for fujitsu siemens amilo laptop (and other laptop based on it)
Created attachment 34870 [details] fsam7400-0.3.1.ebuild
Created attachment 34871 [details] fsam7400-0.4.0.ebuild (it's 0.4.0beta) the pacakge is fsam7400-0.4.0beta.tgz, but i wasn't sure how to manage the "beta" in the name so i removed it and added it inside the ebuild. any suggestions?
see "man 5 ebuild" and search for "beta". Basically beta is an acceptable part of a package name as long as it follows all the digits and is in the form _beta. In the ebuild, you can then creat MY_P=${P/_beta/beta} and use MY_P instead of P for referencing the file or sourcedir, etc.
Created attachment 35537 [details] fsam7400-0.4.0_beta.ebuild fixed ebuild to manage "beta" in the ebuild name. Thanx for the advice.
Versions 0.4.0 (no more beta) is out, just need to mv fsam7400-0.3.1.ebuild fsam7400-0.4.0.ebuild
Is there something that keep this ebuild out of the portage?
Isn't the fsam module part of net-wireless/rfswitch?
it seems not look at this http://rfswitch.sourceforge.net/?page=laptop_matrix Many laptop use Fsaam whitch is not part of rfswitch.
Sorry, you're right. Only the av5100 and pbe5 modules are included in rfswitch-0.1. The ebuild looks good to me.
so it could be imported in portage?
Given that a Gentoo developer volunteers to commit and maintain it, yes. Problem is... if no developers have the hardware to test this software it not possible to test new releases etc.
Is it possible to become the maintainer of an ebuild? What is the process? I wrote some ebuild that i sent to bugzilla, and submit some bug reporrt and fix to other also. But it's hard to maintain an ebuild that remain in bugzilla.
Created attachment 42408 [details] fsam7400-0.4.0.ebuild
bump. What is the reason to keep it outside the portage?
(In reply to comment #12) > Is it possible to become the maintainer of an ebuild? > What is the process? I wrote some ebuild that i sent to bugzilla, and submit >some bug reporrt and fix to other also. Sorry, this is not possible. Only official Gentoo devs have access to CVS. If you do not have access to Gentoo cvs, you can't really maintain an ebuild.
Maybe it's a bit off topic, but i think there is serious lag in gentoo bugzilla. I already mention that maybe bugzilla is not really the right tool to manage ebuilds. I'm thinking this more than before. This ebuild was submitted 1 year ago. I proposed to maintain it, and i did it as you can see in the "attachment" history of this bug, i did a release each time a new release upstrem appeared. and now i have an answer 7 months after my last post that it's not possible because i don't have cvs access... Moreveover Henrik Brix Andersen said the ebuilds looks good 8 months ago. I understand that you can't give anyone access to cvs and that you need someone to maintain ebuilds, but i think a simple ebuild as this one: only 1 file is installed, and this is done following the same rules are other ebuild like this one. (namely acerhk, that i also wrote, even if the credits goes to the first people that wrote it whereas the portage version is the one that i completely rewrote) i thought "~x86" was for things like this, for ebuilds that looks good but needs some testing. Because if we must wait that a gentoo dev as a specific piece of software to include a simple driver like this, i could wait forever... i did. Anyway, i'm sorry to rant. For me it seems that the gentoo ebuild submissions has became to rigid to be able to get involved in it if you are not a gentoo developpers. I used more energy to try to get it inside portage than writing it. I gave up. to end up i'm using this modules for 1year and a half everyday (1 year and gentoo and now 6 months on ubuntu), and i can confirm it works great.
(In reply to comment #16) > This ebuild was submitted 1 year ago. I proposed to maintain it, and i did it > as you can see in the "attachment" history of this bug, i did a release each >time a new release upstrem appeared. > > and now i have an answer 7 months after my last post that it's not possible > because i don't have cvs access... Uhm, this is probably a misunderstanding. You cannot _maintain_ the ebuild if you are not an official Gentoo developer. But that does not mean that the ebuild won't get into portage. However, there are thousands of new ebuilds waiting for inclusion and there are simply not enough developers to handle this faster. > Moreveover Henrik Brix Andersen said the ebuilds looks good 8 months ago. As you probably have noticed, there is a new bugzilla alias now for new ebuild, so that it is easier to keep track of them. > I understand that you can't give anyone access to cvs and that you need >someone to maintain ebuilds Right... > Because if we must wait that a gentoo dev as a specific piece of > software to include a simple driver like this, i could wait forever... i did. Yes, only devs are able to submit a new ebuild to portage. FYI, there are quite a few ebuilds that have been sitting in the queue even longer. Also, the ebuild needs to be tested before it is commited - and in case of drivers this of course requires having access to hardware to be able to test it, or rely on other people who are able to test it. > Anyway, i'm sorry to rant. For me it seems that the gentoo ebuild submissions > has became to rigid to be able to get involved in it if you are not a gentoo > developpers. If you have a better suggestion how to manage the ebuild backlog, than discuss your ideas in an appropriate mailing list. That said, the number or developers is limited and this is a non-commercial volunteer distribution. Thanks for your effort.
(In reply to comment #17) > > Moreveover Henrik Brix Andersen said the ebuilds looks good 8 months ago. > > As you probably have noticed, there is a new bugzilla alias now for new ebuild, > so that it is easier to keep track of them. Sorry i didn't notice as this ebuild was the last i submitted, because i had the feeling to loose my time. > > Because if we must wait that a gentoo dev as a specific piece of > > software to include a simple driver like this, i could wait forever... i did. > > Yes, only devs are able to submit a new ebuild to portage. FYI, there are quite > a few ebuilds that have been sitting in the queue even longer. Also, the ebuild > needs to be tested before it is commited - and in case of drivers this of course > requires having access to hardware to be able to test it, or rely on other > people who are able to test it. As i understand it, it just bad luck for me :) > If you have a better suggestion how to manage the ebuild backlog, than discuss > your ideas in an appropriate mailing list. That said, the number or developers > is limited and this is a non-commercial volunteer distribution. I used to have some suggestions, but i'm no more really active on the debian front as nowadays i only use it on 2 servers as it fits my needs there. I don't know how it is theses days, but 1 years ago, it wasn't easy to make ebuild request, or submitting ebuilds. For example when i go to bugs.gentoo.org i can't find where i could see/add ebuild request. Or i can't easily see what ebuilds are pending waiting to be reviewed. Maybe it's just me that is not used to the process. Anyway as yoou said, it's not the right place to have these discussions. > Thanks for your effort. Thankx for yours, and taking time to answer me!
here is a new ebuild for the 0.5.1 version, including updating to the new(in terms of this bug) linux-mod.eclass
Created attachment 114246 [details] ebuild for fsam7400-0.5.1
thank you for bugging me in IRC I committed this for you :) thanks to all contributors.
