After much development time been able to finalize a-0.4.0 release. This version is much more stable than any preceding releases and I think it should be stable enough to be unmasked. Almost everything has been improved/debugged. We are now using pythons semaphore system to eliminate collisions between threaded modules accessing/modifying variables at the same time. Feature enhancements are too numerous to list here. Check for them in the NEWS file in the release tarball. I used port001's latest ebuild and modified it for the new debug use flag to optionally install pycrash for additional debug info in the event of a crash. (side note: pycrash-0.4_pre3 has been no trouble for me in porthole's development and actually quite usefull) I have a question on the arch's. port001's latest ebuild has removed ppc and amd64. Is there something I need to do to make it usable on all the other arch's that gentoo supports? Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3.
Created attachment 41600 [details] portage_overlay/app-portage/porthole tar.bz2
Created attachment 41767 [details] porthole-0.4.0.ebuild Please upload ebuilds as plain text only. And there is no need for the Manifest or digest files.
Created attachment 41783 [details] edited porthole-0.4.0.ebuild Sorry about submitting the whole overlay. The syntax error in the RDEPEND did not show up as a fault on my system but others on the forum did. I edited the ebuild to what WhyteWolf corrected it to.
When I try to do an advanced emerge I get: (porthole:16153): libglade-WARNING **: could not find glade file '/usr/share/porthole/advemerge.glade' Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/porthole/mainwindow.py", line 437, in adv_emerge_package dialog = AdvancedEmergeDialog(self.prefs, package, self.setup_command) File "/usr/lib/porthole/advemerge.py", line 45, in __init__ self.wtree = gtk.glade.XML(self.gladefile, "adv_emerge_dialog") RuntimeError: could not create GladeXML object I'm using: dev-python/pygtk-2.4.0 gnome-base/libglade-2.4.0 Looks pretty nice otherwise
Created attachment 41837 [details, diff] setup.py.patch Fixes bug in my previous comment. The setup.py file was missing a glade file.
Created attachment 41838 [details, diff] setup.py.patch
I have pactched the source and made a new tar.bz2. Before I upload it. Should I rename it to -0.4.0a or 0.4.1 or something. Or should I replace it and post on the forum thread to re-dowload the ebuild & emerge it again. Brian
Have a look at comment #1 for bug #67537 with regards to checking for gnome support in dev-python/pygtk. I propose deleting pkg_setup() for porthole-0.4.0 as done with updated ebuild attached to bug #67537. Porthole will work even though dev-python/pygtk is installed as follows: bash# USE="-gnome" emerge dev-python/pygtk
The last time I checked you could overwrite releases on sourceforge, but it can be a pain having different versions for a while until it propogates through the mirrors. I'd give it a new version myself. You might want to check bug# 67610 while you're at it. Besides the issue in that bug, the *.pyc files in /usr/lib/porthole won't get removed in an un-merge because they get don't get created until after the first run. Another good reason to put them in /usr/lib/python${PYTHON_VERSION}/site-packages/porthole/
Created attachment 41937 [details] new revamped ebuild porthole-0.4.1 I have removed the pkg_setup{} as porthole does run without pygtk gnome support. It also installs an updated porthole which installs to ~/site-packages/porthole/
I have uploaded the first testing version of porthole-0.4.1 to my webspace for some preliminary testing and feedback before I upload it to sourceforge. you can download it here: http://www3.telus.net/dol-sen/porthole/porthole-0.4.1.tar.bz2 It has been changed to install into ~/site-packages/porthole. I have successfully run it as a local copy and installed version, pygtk installed with and without gnome support.
I made a few more small changes and have uploaded the new tarball to the link above.
Has anyone tested the -0.4.1 ebuild and preliminary tarball for suitability? It seems to have been working fine for me this last week. With portage-2.0.51 released all porthole versions prior to 0.4.0 will be broken with the new portage. I have fixed a few more small bugs and will try to package it up for a -0.4.1 release tonight. I would like to know if I did something wrong in the changed install/ebuild before releasing it. Thanks... Brian
I have just released porthole-0.4.1_rc1. I have posted it to our souceforge site and made a post in Gentoo Chat. You should be able to close this bug. I beleive I have adressed everything from this bug.
porthole-0.4.1_rc1 bug # 68670
Created attachment 43611 [details] porthole-0.4.1 ebuild
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 68670 ***
