On 17/02/16 09:50, Allan McRae wrote:

On 17/02/16 17:11, Evangelos Foutras wrote:

...

This is partial revert of 8454daa7feef (makepkg: run pkgver() and prepare() with --noextract).

Reasoning for the reversion (copied from FS#43498):

Running prepare() when --noextract is used no longer allows running 'makepkg -o && makepkg -e' with any PKGBUILD that applies patches in prepare(). [1]

Sure there's --noprepare which restores the old behavior, but that's a lot of extra typing for what I believe is a much more common use of --noextract.

So you are taking this from a case where you can use makepkg --noextract with or without prepare() and making it so you can only use it without to avoid some typing...

When there is no reason to be doing that, then removing this "feature" is the correct approach. prepare() is there to modify the sources after extraction; otherwise we might as well move its body into build(). Quoting another of my comments on FS#43498: ===================================================================== I don't see the need for a --prepare switch to be used together with --noextract (I consider prepare() tightly coupled to source extraction); its usefulness would be minimal at best. If someone really wants to call prepare() when not extracting sources (for some special testing/bisect scenario), they can call it from build(). ===================================================================== Running prepare() with --noextract makes no sense to me and, therefore, do not believe it needs to be a supported configuration. YAGNI seems to apply in this case. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_aren't_gonna_need_it

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 4:54 AM, Daniel Wallace wrote:

I kind of agree with this and would rather have a prepare switch to turn it on with no extract.

That appears to be Allan's suggestion more or less; restoring the old behavior but also providing a --prepare option to allow running prepare() with --noextract. I'm advocating that such an option has a tiny or even nonexistent use case, to the point that it should not be implemented at all; i.e.: it would be inelegant to have such an option.

On 19/02/16 13:23, Evangelos Foutras wrote:

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 4:54 AM, Daniel Wallace wrote:

...

I kind of agree with this and would rather have a prepare switch to turn it on with no extract.

That appears to be Allan's suggestion more or less; restoring the old behavior but also providing a --prepare option to allow running prepare() with --noextract. I'm advocating that such an option has a tiny or even nonexistent use case, to the point that it should not be implemented at all; i.e.: it would be inelegant to have such an option.

I'm going to pull this patch. But if a good use-case for running prepare() with --noextract is presented, either you need to provide a patch providing a --prepare flag, or this will be reverted. Allan

On 06/03/16 04:19, Dominik Fischer wrote:

I just noticed that this also reverses the order of the functions. In pacman 5.0.0, pkgver still ran before prepare.

It indeed makes more sense to me to determine the pkgver from the patched or otherwise fixed sources. The change simplifies many of my packages. However, it is not mentioned in the commit message.

Is this intentional? Will it stay this way?

It was unintended with that patch, but had been intended to happen in the next release... It will stay that way and I will update the documentation. A