Currently it is not possible to pass DOCS through to multilib_src_install() and/or multilib_src_install_all() without triggering the implicit doc installation code. Please run that code as default implementation of multilib_src_install_all() instead, to allow proper overriding. As a note, this should be probably carried out after einstalldocs() land in eutils.eclass, so that people would be able to easily get the default in their own impl like: multilib_src_install_all() { einstalldocs ... }
FYI, einstalldocs has been approved by Council and added to eutils.eclass today.
Why is bug 459692 a blocker for this bug? einstalldocs in eutils should be good enough. (?)
Ping. 5 weeks without an answer.
That would be a change in behavior, so it has to be tested/fixed on _all_ packages using this eclass.
If you're fine with it, I'll start adding 'einstalldocs' to the deps wherever necessary. Worst case, packages would have docs installed twice for short time. I just need the confirmation that we are ready to go.
confirmation is when we have a patch and when we have tested it on all dependencies there are not too many reverse deps, so I guess we could do it without diego
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #5) > If you're fine with it, I'll start adding 'einstalldocs' to the deps > wherever necessary. Worst case, packages would have docs installed twice for > short time. I just need the confirmation that we are ready to go. Last time I checked, about half of the inheriting ebuilds had things like explicit dodoc calls in src_install, so they would need no change at all. (In reply to Julian Ospald (hasufell) from comment #6) > confirmation is when we have a patch and when we have tested it on all > dependencies All in all, I don't see much potential for breakage. Missing doc files aren't catastrophic.
Oops, I don't know why that blocker appeared. Sorry for the bugspam.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #7) > (In reply to Julian Ospald (hasufell) from comment #6) > > confirmation is when we have a patch and when we have tested it on all > > dependencies > > All in all, I don't see much potential for breakage. Missing doc files > aren't catastrophic. Maybe, maybe not. From now on I will do _nothing_ for any feature request until I see a patch. I am not interested in adding stuff, asking for review, getting an ok and then have people tell me a few weeks later it wasn't what they wanted.
Created attachment 360778 [details, diff] Patch for multilib-minimal.eclass (In reply to Julian Ospald (hasufell) from comment #9) > I am not interested in adding stuff, asking for review, getting an ok and > then have people tell me a few weeks later it wasn't what they wanted. Well, we're all humans, so mistakes happen. Patch is attached, please review.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #10) > Created attachment 360778 [details, diff] [details, diff] > Patch for multilib-minimal.eclass > > (In reply to Julian Ospald (hasufell) from comment #9) > > I am not interested in adding stuff, asking for review, getting an ok and > > then have people tell me a few weeks later it wasn't what they wanted. > > Well, we're all humans, so mistakes happen. > > Patch is attached, please review. See, I am not sure that this is what the reporter wants.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #10) > Created attachment 360778 [details, diff] [details, diff] > Patch for multilib-minimal.eclass > > Patch is attached, please review. LGTM. Though I'd rather put einstalldocs where necessary first. It wouldn't hurt if both the ebuild and the eclass call it.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #12) > LGTM. Though I'd rather put einstalldocs where necessary first. It wouldn't > hurt if both the ebuild and the eclass call it. All ebuilds should be ready now. If someone takes a second look, please remember that some ebuilds intentionally skipped installing docs.
I'll try to do some testing at weekend, a bit busy right now.
running tests now
all consumers tested
+ 20 Oct 2013; Julian Ospald <hasufell@gentoo.org> multilib-minimal.eclass: + make doc installation part of default multilib_src_install_all() wrt #483304
(In reply to Julian Ospald (hasufell) from comment #16) > all consumers tested (In reply to Julian Ospald (hasufell) from comment #17) > + 20 Oct 2013; Julian Ospald <hasufell@gentoo.org> multilib-minimal.eclass: > + make doc installation part of default multilib_src_install_all() wrt > #483304 Thanks a lot!
*** Bug 487852 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***