I am the author of cdstatus (http://cdstatus.sf.net). I have now been using Gentoo heavily for about a year, but the fact that there was an ebuild for cdstatus already when I started using it came as a bit of a surprise. The original ebuild creator (don't know who that was, but my thanks for his efforts) should have marked the KEYWORDS with ~x86, as the version chosen was a beta with a couple of known bugs. I have just finished releasing cdstatus 0.95.03 which is significantly improved over the current version in portage. It includes a user configurable preferences file, has numerous bugfixes, and has an improved autoconf/automake wrapper. I have zero prior experience with ebuild script creation, but I have attempted to write one for the newly released version, and it appears to work. If it needs to be massaged/edited further, obviously that is fine. My main desire is for a working, rather than buggy, version to be the one in portage.
Created attachment 56564 [details] New ebuild for cdstatus-0.95.03 May require further adjustment, but appears to work.
fixed in cvs, thanks
cdstatus-0.95.03 is non beta and is fairly well tested, if not on gentoo. It may or may not make sense to leave it as ~x86. cdstatus-0.94a however (the only former ebuild version) is ALPHA software, with known bugs, some of which are ugly. It NEEDS to be masked. If both packages end up being masked for now, fine, but at least the alpha needs to be. I would rather, as the developer, that both packages were masked, than that people only had a buggy alpha version available upon which to judge the software. I would prefer that the 0.95.03 not be masked, but I understand that a certain trial period may be smart with it masked.
After re-reading what I just wrote, I would like to clarify the fact that cdstatus-0.95.03 was developed on Gentoo, and all of my own testing of it has been performed on Gentoo. The former comment was meant to indicate lack of testing by the general Gentoo community as a part of portage.
One other thing I have noticed after examining the release .ebuild. The normal 'make install' (if the configure, make, make install process is used) places cdstatus.cfg in /usr/share. This is a template for a per-user configuration file. The documentation refers to copying this file to one's home directory and renaming it to .cdstatus to edit as needed. The original ebuild I submitted did install this (although it incorrectly failed to install the docs). Without this file being installed, the ebuild is essentially broken as all files included in the distribution for installation are not installed properly. I am not an ebuild wiz, but whatever edits need to be re-made to the .ebuild to remedy this should be made I believe.
implemented your suggestions. since you're the developer, please take a look at bug 89649 . thanks :)
