[aur-general] Review request for 3 related PKGBUILDs
leonid.bloch at esrf.fr
Tue Jan 3 21:52:12 UTC 2017
Thanks for the explanation, Eli!
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Eli Schwartz <eschwartz93 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 01/03/2017 04:12 PM, Leonid Bloch wrote:
> > Thanks! That was very helpful!
> > All applied, except... "--skip-build" - indeed it makes sense, but I
> > have never seen it with other Python packages. So I wonder if indeed it
> > is a good practice, or is there some reason not to include it?
> Well, python-setuptools does it, but it doesn't seem to be very popular.
> Really, for Make-powered builds the dependencies for "install" are going
> to run anyway (but they were built during build() and usually do
> nothing, silently).
> Then again, a lot of python PKGBUILDs don't have a build() function at
> all, which means the package() function will invoke "build" itself.
> Apparently, there is an arcane difference between building a python
> module and compiling an ELF binary, but no one has told me what that
> difference may be... I don't usually pay attention to what other people
> do. :)
> It makes no difference whether you look at the repos or the AUR, both
> have people who do all three styles.
> The only practical difference would be if someone, say, ran `makepkg
> --nobuild && makepkg --repackage` on a VCS package, which they shouldn't.
> Eli Schwartz
More information about the aur-general