On 10/8/18 3:42 am, Luke Shumaker wrote:

From: Luke Shumaker <lukeshu@parabola.nu>

lint_pkgver returns 0 if PKGVERFUNC, since it's likely that update_pkgver() will change the value of pkgver anyway, and there's no point in linting the old value. update_pkgver() will call check_pkgver() itself to validate the new value.

However, that "optimization" only holds if we're definitely going to call update_pkgver() later; and that's way more complicated than

if (( PKGVERFUNC )); then

it's more like:

if (( !GENINTEG && !PACKAGELIST && !PRINTSRCINFO && !SOURCEONLY && !REPKG && PKGVERFUNC )); then

Which is to say: If I have a PKGBUILD with pkgver():

* if I run `makepkg -g` I expect it to lint pkgver, but it won't * if I run `makepkg -R` I expect it to lint pkgver, but it won't * ...

So let's fix that.

Rather than try to keep a huge list of conditions in sync with the flow of makepkg.sh.in, let's just drop it. As far as I can tell, the only thing that skipping lint_pkgver() really enables is letting the PKGBUILD author write `pkgver=` in the initial version, and letting pkgver() fill it in. They can just start writing `pkgver=0` for that workflow. ---

Massive commit message for a -5 patch! You have me convinced. Also, it is great to see an @parabola email address contributing.

scripts/libmakepkg/lint_pkgbuild/pkgver.sh.in | 5 ----- 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/libmakepkg/lint_pkgbuild/pkgver.sh.in b/scripts/libmakepkg/lint_pkgbuild/pkgver.sh.in index 65216b64..e9b1566f 100644 --- a/scripts/libmakepkg/lint_pkgbuild/pkgver.sh.in +++ b/scripts/libmakepkg/lint_pkgbuild/pkgver.sh.in @@ -44,10 +44,5 @@ check_pkgver() { }

lint_pkgver() { - if (( PKGVERFUNC )); then - # defer check to after getting version from pkgver function - return 0 - fi - check_pkgver "$pkgver" }