[pacman-dev] [PATCH] Integrate versionpkg into makepkg

[Aaron Griffin]

On 10/26/07, Scott Horowitz <stonecrest at gmail.com> wrote:
> I personally found it silly to have separate scripts for makepkg and
> versionpkg. I've seen countless messages on AUR where people ask for
> -svn PKGBUILDS to be updated because their pkgver is out of date, etc.
> Many people don't know about versionpkg and, even if you do, it makes
> sense to have a single script that handles both.
>
> Please look at the patch carefully because I am by no means a shell
> scripting expert. I tested it with mpd-svn and mpd PKGBUILDS; both
> worked fine but that hardly means everything is perfect.

Great idea. Personally, I've never looked at versionpkg, but I did
like the functionality of it.

I only have a few comments, which are probably more directed at
versionpkg itself.

> +update_pb() {
> +       sed -i "1,11 s/pkgver=[^ ]*/pkgver=$1/" ./$BUILDSCRIPT
> +}
> +

The 1,11 scares me here. It seems kinda arbitrary. To me this seems better:

   sed -i "s/^pkgver=[^ ]*/pkgver=$1/" ./$BUILDSCRIPT

But might also fail. I don't know, but the 1,11 choice is off-putting to me.

> +# This is lame, but if we're wanting to use an updated pkgver for
> +# retrieving svn/cvs/etc sources, we'll update the PKGBUILD, re-source
> +# it, and then revert it
> +if [ "$newpkgver" != "" ]; then
> +       if [ "newpkgver" != "$pkgver" ]; then
> +               oldpkgver=$pkgver
> +               update_pb $newpkgver
> +               source $BUILDSCRIPT
> +               update_pb $oldpkgver
> +       fi
> +fi
> +

Hmmm this scares me too. HOWEVER, if we're going to do this, wouldn't
it be smarter to actually NOT revert to the old version and maybe
output something?