Summary: | eapply broken in BSD environment | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Yuta SATOH <nigoro.dev> |
Component: | Core | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | bsd+disabled, kumba, masanori.ogino, pilla, wizardedit |
Priority: | Normal | Keywords: | InVCS, PATCH |
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | FreeBSD | ||
See Also: | https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=670468 | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 573774 | ||
Attachments: |
sample patch for bin/phase-helpers.sh
tested ebuild-helpers/bsd/patch (Replacement from sed to patch) |
Description
Yuta SATOH
2016-02-13 11:38:11 UTC
Created attachment 425394 [details, diff]
sample patch for bin/phase-helpers.sh
Apparently addition of new aliases does not affect previously defined functions (at least in bash 4.3)... I think that something like the following would be more readable: local patch_executable type -P gpatch > /dev/null && patch_executable=gpatch || patch_executable=patch ... ${patch_executable} -p1 -f -s -g0 ... *** Bug 579578 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 585844 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 585956 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** We can use a bin/ebuild-helpers/bsd/patch script, similar to bin/ebuild-helpers/bsd/sed. Created attachment 437930 [details, diff] tested ebuild-helpers/bsd/patch (Replacement from sed to patch) (In reply to Zac Medico from comment #6) > We can use a bin/ebuild-helpers/bsd/patch script, similar to > bin/ebuild-helpers/bsd/sed. I tried your idea. And, I was confirm that the patch is applied. Please add a helper script. (In reply to Yuta SATOH from comment #7) > Created attachment 437930 [details, diff] [details, diff] > tested ebuild-helpers/bsd/patch (Replacement from sed to patch) Looks good, except I think we should remove the EPATCH variable support. The ESED variable probably isn't used by anyone, so I'd prefer not to support another variable that's not really needed. Hmm, I wonder if the patch wrapper will break some bsd build systems due to them expecting a bsd version of the patch command in $PATH. If so, it will be safer not to use a wrapper. @bsd team: Do you think a patch wrapper that forces gpatch will break things? This is in the master branch: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=abf71501a7d81f95770322497995c205eff1999c Fixed in 2.3.0. |