dev-python/sphinx was added to 0.4.1 and pulls in a lot of stuff. It would be nice if that was optional with a USE=doc flag.
Created attachment 556222 [details, diff] zathura-0.4.1.ebuild.patch
Created attachment 556224 [details, diff] zathura-optional.doc.patch (new file)
Added a donwstream patch file (zathura-optional-doc.patch) and the ebuild patch to add USE=doc.
report it upstream, gentoo has nothing to do here
Upstream only accepts making it automagic, but says we should patch it if we want sphinx optional. I don't see any problem with that?
are there any references whewre they refuse to patch this?
In the spirit of http://www-sop.inria.fr/members/Joelle.Despeyroux/proofs.txt "Proof by Personal Communication" (irc://oftc.net/pwmt): > [11:23 Sebastinas] Then please patch that downstream. It was later mentioned that they might apply an according patch after the move to meson-0.74.0. Though I don't know when this will happen.
Erratum: meson-0.47.0
meh, it is stupid Ok, I will take a look as I am not ok with spinx being needlessly installed on my desktop, and heard there are patches sent to upstream, though :/
In all fairness, should add that sphinx is properly a bdep, contrary what it says in the ebuild. So if the patch is not all-right, at least it should be moved over into DEPEND.
For reference: we are not opposed to fixing this properly upstream. However, we won't take the patch as is and would prefer to fix this by using meson 0.47's "feature" build option (for all optional dependencies). If you, Cedric, can't be bothered to update the patch so that we are happy to maintain it in the future, then yes, you'll have to "patch it downstream". Otherwise be patient and wait until we have the time and motivation to fix that ourselves. And the motivation to do that is non existing after our interaction.
(In reply to Sebastian Ramacher from comment #11) > For reference: we are not opposed to fixing this properly upstream. However, > we won't take the patch as is and would prefer to fix this by using meson > 0.47's "feature" build option (for all optional dependencies). If you, > Cedric, can't be bothered to update the patch so that we are happy to > maintain it in the future, then yes, you'll have to "patch it downstream". > Otherwise be patient and wait until we have the time and motivation to fix > that ourselves. And the motivation to do that is non existing after our > interaction. Excuse me, but I don't think that insinuating I couldn't be bothered to update the patch is fair, since your reply to my offering the patch was: > [13:53 Sebastinas] Come back after we've switch to meson 0.48 and its features support. and I even added > [14:14 ManDay] yeah, if you moved to meson-0.47 and it's still mandatory I'll try to get you another patch That said, I offered the patch for current situation and proposed I'd port it, once the build system is updated, so I think both, your reluctance to apply it and your response right here are much uncalled for.
"<Sebastinas> I won't accept in the current state. If you re-write it using meson features, then I'll happily take it."
Why is dev-python/sphinx even listed in RDEPENDS? It's a build dependency only. It is not required during runtime at all.
Fixed upstream by Sebastian: https://git.pwmt.org/pwmt/zathura/compare/fac4f7fea3ae735492b77a18731dacd22df8c5e8...6719bee7 Adding the patch for -9999. FWIW, the meson eclass does not enforce the required >=meson-0.47, but since 0.47 is in all stable this should work.
Created attachment 556774 [details, diff] Updates required for ebuild
(In reply to Cedric Sodhi from comment #15) > Fixed upstream by Sebastian: > > https://git.pwmt.org/pwmt/zathura/compare/ > fac4f7fea3ae735492b77a18731dacd22df8c5e8...6719bee7 > > Adding the patch for -9999. FWIW, the meson eclass does not enforce the > required >=meson-0.47, but since 0.47 is in all stable this should work. then I do not see the point to port it
Please clarify? Port what? Why did you mark the ebuild-patch as obsolete and why is this now WONTFIX?
(In reply to Cedric Sodhi from comment #18) > Please clarify? Port what? Why did you mark the ebuild-patch as obsolete and > why is this now WONTFIX? I am not gonna fix upstream madness and port ton of patches just because they change their mind all the time. Maybe they will fix in in the new release.
Might this be a misunderstanding? The problem was *properly* fixed upstream. My ebuild patch merely added the newly gained "manpages" feature under a "doc" USE flag for future versions (and necessarily in -9999). So I think this can be closed RESOLVED FIXED or UPSTREAM?
