Skip to content
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

respect SRCEXT from makepkg.conf #49

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

kgizdov
Copy link
Contributor

@kgizdov kgizdov commented May 20, 2020

as the title says

@anthraxx
Copy link
Member

this patch does not work as you expect, if you dont expotr $SRCEXT in the invoking shell this variable will simply be empty and the glob will just cat whatever is in that directory.

@kgizdov
Copy link
Contributor Author

kgizdov commented May 20, 2020

@anthraxx on the contrary, the variable is available because of makepkg --source call. Not to mention, if you were right, the whole script wouldn't work. I tested it myself.

@Foxboron
Copy link
Member

@kgizdov Why would makepkg --source make $SRCEXT available?

@kgizdov
Copy link
Contributor Author

kgizdov commented May 20, 2020

@anthraxx it makes everything in makepkg.conf available. Look at PKGDEST being used directly too. Have you tried running the script or? Does it work for you?

@Foxboron
Copy link
Member

@kgizdov $PKGDEST is available because of the load_makepkg_config function on line 125.

load_makepkg_config

@kgizdov
Copy link
Contributor Author

kgizdov commented May 20, 2020

@anthraxx Indeed, last discussion I saw on this was about having makepkg source its environment. Nevermind, I will update the PR

@anthraxx
Copy link
Member

what? this is a child process invocation of makepkg and not a function call, it can't source anything magically into the parent process. I am 100% right and it would be great to technically verify what I have explained before claiming I didn't do my homework.

@kgizdov
Copy link
Contributor Author

kgizdov commented May 20, 2020

@anthraxx yes, you are correct, I misunderstood where/how this is done, based on old discussion.

Also, mentioned the wrong person because being on my phone - meant to answer @Foxboron in a couple of those.

Is it ok now?

@kgizdov
Copy link
Contributor Author

kgizdov commented Jan 18, 2021

is anything else needed to be done about this?

@anthraxx
Copy link
Member

anthraxx commented Jan 26, 2021

applied in d507db9
thanks for the patch

@anthraxx anthraxx closed this Jan 26, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants