Subject: RE: [alpine-aports] [PATCH] testing/libgflags: new aport

From: David Huffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 12:23:33 -0500

Since it only provides a library and not an application, I figured it would be preferable for organization purposes. Was I wrong?

(Sorry about you getting this twice, my email client apparently isn’t a fan of replying to mailing lists without some coercion.)
Warm regards,

David Huffman

From: Sören Tempel
Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2016 10:29 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [alpine-aports] [PATCH] testing/libgflags: new aport

On 09.01.16, David Huffman wrote:
> +# Contributor: David Huffman <[email-masked]>
> +# Maintainer: David Huffman <[email-masked]>
> +pkgname=libgflags
> +pkgver=2.1.2
> +_srcname=gflags-$pkgver

Is there any reason why you called the package libgflags instead of
simply naming it gflags? Than you wouldn't need the _srcname variable...

Sören.

---

From: Timo Teras <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:35:48 +0200

On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 12:23:33 -0500
David Huffman <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Since it only provides a library and not an application, I figured it
> would be preferable for organization purposes. Was I wrong?
> 
> (Sorry about you getting this twice, my email client apparently isn’t
> a fan of replying to mailing lists without some coercion.) Warm
> regards,

Yes, this is the standard practice. library-only stuff is usually
prefixed with lib.

The aport looks good with the exception that it installs:
usr/bin/gflags_completions.sh

Either delete it or make it a subpkg with install_if for bash. See tmux
or grep "bash-completion" in the main/*/APKBUILD for examples.

Please resend that fixed, and I'm happy to apply it.

Thanks,
Timo

> simply naming it gflags? Than you wouldn't need the _srcname

---
Unsubscribe:  [email-masked]
Help:         [email-masked]
---