Summary: | app-arch/bzip2: Handwritten Makefile to autotools conversion. | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | hanetzer |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Gentoo's Team for Core System packages <base-system> |
Status: | IN_PROGRESS --- | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | sam, tsmksubc, vapier |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
See Also: |
https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/5707 https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/9254 |
||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Deadline: | 2018-10-14 |
Description
hanetzer
2017-11-04 18:59:30 UTC
Please also try contacting the upstream author at jseward@acm.org . (In reply to Felix Janda from comment #1) > Please also try contacting the upstream author at jseward@acm.org . Oh, nice. I had tried emailing both jseward@bzip.org and julian@bzip.org, but both emails got bounced back as deliverable. I will give that email a shot as well. @ Mike Frysinger: Please comment on that fact that new bzip2 package would lose USE=static. Is this a problem? (In reply to hanetzer from comment #2) > (In reply to Felix Janda from comment #1) > > Please also try contacting the upstream author at jseward@acm.org . > > Oh, nice. I had tried emailing both jseward@bzip.org and julian@bzip.org, > but both emails got bounced back as deliverable. I will give that email > a shot as well. Did anything actually happen with this? There's a new upstream now. (In reply to Thomas Deutschmann from comment #3) > @ Mike Frysinger: Please comment on that fact that new bzip2 package would > lose USE=static. Is this a problem? Ping. the bzip2 makefile is so simple & fast that i'm not sure what autotools gains us. it looks nicer or something ? it would certainly be slower than what we have now. i would push changes to upstream at this point if it's a little more active. |