New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
games-rpg/baldurs-gate-ee: bump to 2.5.23121 #9747
Conversation
Pull Request assignment Areas affected: ebuilds games-rpg/baldurs-gate-ee: @diogocp, @gentoo/proxy-maint No bugs to link found. If your pull request references any of the Gentoo bug reports, please add appropriate GLEP 66 tags to the commit message and ping us to reset the assignment. In order to force reassignment and/or bug reference scan, please append |
|
||
inherit eutils unpacker | ||
inherit desktop eutils unpacker |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please drop eutils
and unpacker
(you can drop probably src_unpack()
as well?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
eutils
is required for make_wrapper
.
Without unpacker
the file is not recognized. With unpacker
but no explicit unpack_zip
, unpacking fails. I could use unzip
directly, but unpack_zip
seems better. This was also discussed before.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
indeed, thanks.
media-libs/openal[abi_x86_32(-)] | ||
virtual/opengl[abi_x86_32(-)] | ||
x11-libs/libX11[abi_x86_32(-)]" | ||
RDEPEND="dev-libs/expat |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
aren't you missing [${MULTILIB_USEDEP}]
on all those?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think that is necessary. This new version includes both x86 and amd64 binaries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
but then you need to make sure that the dependencies are built for these ABIs as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't want this package to have "multilib" support. It's an application, so I only want to install it for the native ABI. AFAIK the native ABI is implied in dependency specifications that do not explicitly specify another one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ah, yeah. I misinterpreted your previous message, but the ebuild code makes it clear anyway.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please split removal from adding new version. Also, do you think it would be worthwhile to keep the old version for a few days just in case?
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.49, Repoman-2.3.10
f0650aa
to
40ff633
Compare
I kept the old version for now. |
Pull request CI reportReport generated at: 2018-09-21 12:16 UTC No issues found |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
No description provided.