TYPE FILE ET_EXEC /var/tmp/portage/dev-util/crossvc-1.5.2/image//usr/share/CrossVC/crossvc.bin ET_EXEC /var/tmp/portage/dev-util/crossvc-1.5.2/image//usr/share/CrossVC/Tools/rshwrapper
I'd like to present crossvc to the treecleaners as a candidate for removal. It is a qt-3 only application and there has been no development since 2007-09-12. An an alternative, the dev-util/tkcvs provides a gui to cvs.
I would like to volunteer to maintain this package. I have used it for years, it provides much utility and is very stable. After using Gentoo exclusively for a number of years I feel it's time I start giving back and this would be a great place to start. Sorry to be ignorant but please advise who I should contact to pursue this responsibility.
Where is the appropriate place for the ELF files? I'd like to patch the ebuild/source as necessary.
(In reply to comment #2) > I would like to volunteer to maintain this package. I have used it for years, > it provides much utility and is very stable. After using Gentoo exclusively for > a number of years I feel it's time I start giving back and this would be a > great place to start. Sorry to be ignorant but please advise who I should > contact to pursue this responsibility. > Thanks, but this is abandoned upstream and is blocking bug 283429. You'd help more if you find new software replacing this (that isn't in Portage yet), and help getting it in. (In reply to comment #3) > Where is the appropriate place for the ELF files? I'd like to patch the > ebuild/source as necessary. > /usr/lib (libdir). You can use multilib.eclass to get function $(get_libdir) which will print lib (on 32bit) or lib64 (on 64bit), so ebuild snippet could be something like (it's only a demonstration), -- start of example -- EAPI="2" inherit multilib src_configure() { econf \ --libdir=/usr/$(get_libdir) } -- end of example --
*** Bug 301372 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
gone
d'oh! A little early? And I already started the work porting it to QT4. I have not found a suitable alternative and /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask says removal in 30 days, dated January 7. How difficult will it be to get this back in?
*bump* (just wondering why it was removed early)
(In reply to comment #7) > d'oh! A little early? And I already started the work porting it to QT4. I have > not found a suitable alternative and /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask says > removal in 30 days, dated January 7. How difficult will it be to get this back > in? > Not difficult at all. Easy as version version bump. If you get it ported to Qt4, open a new bug and it will be added to tree.
