Ahoy. The attached frobtads-0.10.ebuild is an upstream update to bug 149764 as well as a fix to the ebuild provided there (uses egamesconf now, and only uses -fno-strict-aliasing for CXXFLAGS). In the ebuild, you will see that I'm accessing CXXFLAGS directly; this is because "append-flags" does not allow for appending only to CXXFLAGS, and I did not find any other way to do it other than appending directly to CXXFLAGS. Following Gentoo guidelines, I only used KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86" since I only tested on those Gentoo versions. However, the package itself is supposed to compile and run on all Gentoo ports, no matter what the architecture or operating system is. Furthermore, it obsoletes the ebuilds in bug 73947 and they should *not* be committed (the project is dead and this one is its continuation). I don't know if this should have been tagged as New Package rather than Update since the previous ebuild has not been committed at all yet. About the package: "FrobTADS is a complete rewrite of the Unix console-version of TADS ("Text Adventure Development System"). It uses curses (or ncurses) and provides an interpreter to play games developed with TADS as well as the TADS 2 and 3 development tools. It adds support for a number of relatively recent user interface features including full support for text and background colors, TADS 3 banner windows, and timed input." In addition to the ebuild, I am also attaching the license. This should probably be /usr/portage/licenses/TADS. Since this is an interpreter and development tool for games, I suppose the right category is "games-engines". The original ebuild (bug 149764) has been submitted on 2006-10-01. That's a long time. Will this package make it into portage?
Created attachment 149353 [details] frobtads-0.10.ebuild
Created attachment 149355 [details] TADS 3 Freeware Source Code License The license of the package. This should eventually become /usr/portage/licenses/TADS.
As you referenced the bug that this is a duplicate of...please post any updates on that bug. There is no guarantee that this package will make it into the tree. A developer will have to take responsibility for it. If you want, you can maintain it in our official user overlay (http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/sunrise/). *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 149764 ***
(In reply to comment #3) > As you referenced the bug that this is a duplicate of...please post any updates > on that bug. I followed this guide before posting: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/ebuild-submit.xml It says to submit a new bug tagged with "(Update)" rather than posting in an existing bug. I'm a bit confused about when to post "(Update)" tagged bugs and when to reply to existing bugs.
Nikos, it looks like that documentation page was last updated in 2005, unfortunately. Since it's clearly incorrect, best thing would be to submit a bug for it.
Gah, I wish someone commented on this sooner :P I've posted a new ebuild in a new bug 217341 (for another package) rather than using the existing bug 66189. So the current policy is to always post in existing bugs when submitting ebuilds for new upstream versions?
