Created attachment 870199 [details] The ebuild script and Manifest file contained within a POSIX tar archive (GNU). WARNING: The following dependencies (RDEPEND) were removed from the set of dependencies belonging to the current dev-lisp/ecls-21.2.1-r4: - Dependency: dev-lisp/asdf Reason for removal: Not using the bundled asdf can cause build issues as changes are made to dev-lisp/asdf, the bundled version is guaranteed to work well. WARNING: The following dependencies (DEPEND) were removed from the set of dependencies belonging to the current dev-lisp/ecls-21.2.1-r4: - Dependency: app-editors/emacs Reason for removal: Should not be listed as dependency, vim is better. - Dependency: app-eselect/eselect-emacs Reason for removal: Should not be listed as dependency, vim is faster.
Manifest needs to be remade as I changed the name of the ebuild last second and forgot to update it (originally was dev-lisp/ecl). Does anyone really care though?
> Reason for removal: Should not be listed as dependency, vim is better. > Reason for removal: Should not be listed as dependency, vim is faster. GNU Emacs is/was a conditional dependency and so if the ECL support works still it should not be dropped.
(In reply to Maciej Barć from comment #2) > GNU Emacs is/was a conditional dependency and so if the ECL support works > still it should not be dropped. I have added a new attachment that contains a POSIX tar archive (GNU) that contains an updated ebuild, this is titled 'ecl-2.tar'. I believe that dev-lisp/ecls SHOULD be renamed dev-lisp/ecl. It works well with ${P}.tgz. Let me know if for some reason you think this is a bad change. The following changes were made to the new ebuild: - Added "emacs" to IUSE - Make eselect-emacs and emacs conditionally dependent on "emacs" USE flag - Updated Manifest Let me know if there are any problems.
Created attachment 870259 [details] Updated version of ebuild in POSIX tar archive (GNU)
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=7794ca0d7744f41de880b68e8f88012116e68c51 commit 7794ca0d7744f41de880b68e8f88012116e68c51 Author: Andrey Grozin <grozin@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2023-09-10 15:48:37 +0000 Commit: Andrey Grozin <grozin@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2023-09-10 15:49:07 +0000 dev-lisp/ecls: bump to 23.9.9 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/913906 Signed-off-by: Andrey Grozin <grozin@gentoo.org> dev-lisp/ecls/Manifest | 1 + dev-lisp/ecls/ecls-23.9.9.ebuild | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 90 insertions(+)
(In reply to Liam from comment #3) > (In reply to Maciej Barć from comment #2) > > > GNU Emacs is/was a conditional dependency and so if the ECL support works > > still it should not be dropped. > > I have added a new attachment that contains a POSIX tar archive (GNU) that > contains an updated ebuild, this is titled 'ecl-2.tar'. > > I believe that dev-lisp/ecls SHOULD be renamed dev-lisp/ecl. It works well > with ${P}.tgz. Let me know if for some reason you think this is a bad change. > Would you mind filing a new bug for the rename please?
(In reply to Sam James from comment #6) > (In reply to Liam from comment #3) > > (In reply to Maciej Barć from comment #2) > > > > > GNU Emacs is/was a conditional dependency and so if the ECL support works > > > still it should not be dropped. > > > > I have added a new attachment that contains a POSIX tar archive (GNU) that > > contains an updated ebuild, this is titled 'ecl-2.tar'. > > > > I believe that dev-lisp/ecls SHOULD be renamed dev-lisp/ecl. It works well > > with ${P}.tgz. Let me know if for some reason you think this is a bad change. > > > > Would you mind filing a new bug for the rename please? I will file a new bug report for the rename as soon as I am able to, if someone wants to do that first that would be appreciated. [END REPLY] I want to apologize to everyone for my poor work, I'm new to Gentoo package development and made some mistakes. Next time I submit a version bump bug report, I will: - Make sure this is not a Zero-day bump request as mentioned in the Bugzilla/Bug report guide. - Use the previously existing ebuild as a base, then modify it as necessary to ONLY update the package, separate changes should be requested in a new bug report. - Consider using a version number for a package like asdf instead of removing it for the bundled version. (sorry) - Read properly through Gentoo's documentation and follow the example's set by more experienced Gentoo package maintainers/Gentoo developers.
(In reply to Sam James from comment #6) > Would you mind filing a new bug for the rename please? We already have bug 586230 for this.
*** Bug 913957 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
