On 14/10/10 00:59, Dan McGee wrote:

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Allan McRae wrote:

...

On 14/10/10 00:11, Dan McGee wrote:

...

I think this was alluded to a while back, but we are starting to show some problems with our naming scheme and bash variable/function naming rules:

/usr/bin/makepkg: line 1831: declare: `package_python-xlwt': not a valid identifier

With latest makepkg built from git.

Any chance of some more info on how to replicate? At least the pkgname line or even the whole PKGBUILD?

Haha, my bad.

wget http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python-xlwt/python-xlwt.tar.gz bsdtar xf python-xlwt.tar.gz cd python-xlwt makepkg

I can not replicate with 4.1.x or 3.2.x. Allan

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Allan McRae wrote:

On 14/10/10 01:11, Allan McRae wrote:

...

On 14/10/10 00:59, Dan McGee wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Allan McRae wrote:

...

On 14/10/10 00:11, Dan McGee wrote:

...

I think this was alluded to a while back, but we are starting to show some problems with our naming scheme and bash variable/function naming rules:

/usr/bin/makepkg: line 1831: declare: `package_python-xlwt': not a valid identifier

With latest makepkg built from git.

Any chance of some more info on how to replicate? At least the pkgname line or even the whole PKGBUILD?

Haha, my bad.

wget http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python-xlwt/python-xlwt.tar.gz bsdtar xf python-xlwt.tar.gz cd python-xlwt makepkg

I can not replicate with 4.1.x or 3.2.x.

                          ^ these are bash version....

Hmmmmm. Build output attached, and here is the relevant part of this particular version of makepkg: 1825 # test for available PKGBUILD functions 1826 if declare -f build >/dev/null; then 1827 BUILDFUNC=1 1828 fi 1829 if declare -f package >/dev/null; then 1830 PKGFUNC=1 1831 elif [[ $SPLITPKG -eq 0 ]] && declare -f package_${pkgname}

/dev/null; then 1832 SPLITPKG=1 1833 fi

-Dan

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Allan McRae wrote:

On 14/10/10 01:36, Dan McGee wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Allan McRae  wrote:

...

On 14/10/10 01:11, Allan McRae wrote:

...

On 14/10/10 00:59, Dan McGee wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Allan McRae  wrote:

...

On 14/10/10 00:11, Dan McGee wrote: > > I think this was alluded to a while back, but we are starting to show > some problems with our naming scheme and bash variable/function > naming > rules: > > /usr/bin/makepkg: line 1831: declare: `package_python-xlwt': not a > valid identifier > > With latest makepkg built from git. >

Any chance of some more info on how to replicate? At least the pkgname line or even the whole PKGBUILD?

Haha, my bad.

wget http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python-xlwt/python-xlwt.tar.gz bsdtar xf python-xlwt.tar.gz cd python-xlwt makepkg

I can not replicate with 4.1.x or 3.2.x.

                          ^ these are bash version....

Hmmmmm. Build output attached, and here is the relevant part of this particular version of makepkg:

1825 # test for available PKGBUILD functions 1826 if declare -f build>/dev/null; then 1827   BUILDFUNC=1 1828 fi 1829 if declare -f package>/dev/null; then 1830   PKGFUNC=1 1831 elif [[ $SPLITPKG -eq 0 ]]&&  declare -f package_${pkgname}

...

/dev/null; then

1832   SPLITPKG=1 1833 fi

OK - I can replicate.   I forgot my makepkg-git package builds from my working branch which had not been rebased to master after the last couple of pushes.   But it turns out that was a good thing as there were only a couple of patches that could cause this issue:

05f0a28932c1acab7a9ddb58435d69626dad54da is the first bad commit

commit 05f0a28932c1acab7a9ddb58435d69626dad54da Author: Nezmer Date:   Tue Oct 12 02:23:16 2010 +0300

   Use sysconfdir, localstatedir, BASH instead of hardcoded values

   This applies to contrib/ files, our scripts, and the documentation.

   Dan: fix 'make clean' in contrib/ directory.

   Signed-off-by: Nezmer    Signed-off-by: Dan McGee

....

which does this to the top of makepkg:

#!/bin/sh -e

which is bad...  even when we symlink that to bash as it starts in standards compliance mode.  So you have not broken bash, you have broken configure!

So looking at configure output:

 checking for bash... /bin/sh

and the configure check:

 AC_CHECK_PROGS([BASH], [bash bash4 bash3], [false])

So...  WTF?   It turns out the issues is that the BASH variable seems to be used elsewhere and we have a naming conflict...

Oh man, this makes so much more sense. WTF, configure? The shell itself sets this, try the following (which is what ./configure ends up doing): #!/bin/sh echo $BASH I think I have a patch on the way... -Dan

On 14/10/10 08:52, Dan McGee wrote:

BASH is defined when you are actually using bash during configure, which sucks because it ends up being '/bin/sh', messing up all of our scripts. Change the name of the variable we use in configure, and also ensure we get a full path to the executable by using AC_PATH_PROGS rather than AC_CHECK_PROGS. Finally, change the variable name everywhere we use it.

Signed-off-by: Dan McGee

I was going to that this for a spin but the patch to contrib/Makefile.am does not apply on top of master. Have you another patch to that in the pipeline? Allan

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 05:40:44PM -0500, Dan McGee wrote:

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Allan McRae wrote:

...

On 14/10/10 01:36, Dan McGee wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Allan McRae  wrote:

...

On 14/10/10 01:11, Allan McRae wrote:

...

On 14/10/10 00:59, Dan McGee wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Allan McRae  wrote: > > On 14/10/10 00:11, Dan McGee wrote: >> >> I think this was alluded to a while back, but we are starting to show >> some problems with our naming scheme and bash variable/function >> naming >> rules: >> >> /usr/bin/makepkg: line 1831: declare: `package_python-xlwt': not a >> valid identifier >> >> With latest makepkg built from git. >> > > Any chance of some more info on how to replicate? At least the > pkgname line > or even the whole PKGBUILD?

Haha, my bad.

wget http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python-xlwt/python-xlwt.tar.gz bsdtar xf python-xlwt.tar.gz cd python-xlwt makepkg

I can not replicate with 4.1.x or 3.2.x.

                          ^ these are bash version....

Hmmmmm. Build output attached, and here is the relevant part of this particular version of makepkg:

1825 # test for available PKGBUILD functions 1826 if declare -f build>/dev/null; then 1827   BUILDFUNC=1 1828 fi 1829 if declare -f package>/dev/null; then 1830   PKGFUNC=1 1831 elif [[ $SPLITPKG -eq 0 ]]&&  declare -f package_${pkgname}

...

/dev/null; then

1832   SPLITPKG=1 1833 fi

OK - I can replicate.   I forgot my makepkg-git package builds from my working branch which had not been rebased to master after the last couple of pushes.   But it turns out that was a good thing as there were only a couple of patches that could cause this issue:

05f0a28932c1acab7a9ddb58435d69626dad54da is the first bad commit

commit 05f0a28932c1acab7a9ddb58435d69626dad54da Author: Nezmer Date:   Tue Oct 12 02:23:16 2010 +0300

   Use sysconfdir, localstatedir, BASH instead of hardcoded values

   This applies to contrib/ files, our scripts, and the documentation.

   Dan: fix 'make clean' in contrib/ directory.

   Signed-off-by: Nezmer    Signed-off-by: Dan McGee

....

which does this to the top of makepkg:

#!/bin/sh -e

which is bad...  even when we symlink that to bash as it starts in standards compliance mode.  So you have not broken bash, you have broken configure!

So looking at configure output:

 checking for bash... /bin/sh

and the configure check:

 AC_CHECK_PROGS([BASH], [bash bash4 bash3], [false])

So...  WTF?   It turns out the issues is that the BASH variable seems to be used elsewhere and we have a naming conflict...

Oh man, this makes so much more sense. WTF, configure?

The shell itself sets this, try the following (which is what ./configure ends up doing): #!/bin/sh echo $BASH

I think I have a patch on the way...

-Dan

My bad. I would have caught this If I tested with Arch. This does not happen in FreeBSD. What is setting BASH exactly?

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Nezmer wrote:

...

...

Oh man, this makes so much more sense. WTF, configure?

The shell itself sets this, try the following (which is what ./configure ends up doing): #!/bin/sh echo $BASH

I think I have a patch on the way...

-Dan

My bad.

I would have caught this If I tested with Arch. This does not happen in FreeBSD.

What is setting BASH exactly?

Just saw the patch. Sorry again for the breakage.

Once I decide to take the patch it is as much my fault, so have no worries at all here. That's why we don't release straight from git without some testing first. :) -Dan