[csw-maintainers] review requested for Emacs GARification

[Peter FELECAN]

Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> writes:

> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 23.05.2012 um 16:06 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen:
>> Am 23.05.2012 um 16:04 schrieb pfelecan at opencsw.org:
>>> I think that I advanced quite well in my struggle of GARification for
>>> Emacs. However, I'm stuck in the post-install modulation... Can a
>>> knowledgeable maintainer review the recipe and help me out for this issue
>>> and point out the other issues that he encounters.
>>> 
>>> FYI, the significant changes are in
>>> http://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gar?view=revision&revision=18093
>> 
>> Sure, I'll have a look.

Thank you Dagobert for the review.

> I collapsed the rules to just use $(FEATURES), apart from that the isa-default
> is unfortunately not possible in the make rules, just variable expansions:
>   http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/18096

Alright. For this case it works but there are case where it doesn't work
this way, e.g. libcurl. Me thinks that documenting and giving a salient
example in the modulation documentation will be beneficial for everybody.

> Additionally I have some suggestions which would make the Makefile more in line
> with the other Makefiles:
> - Use multiple additions instead of line continuation, e.g.
>     WHAT += arg1
>     WHAT += arg2
>   instead of
>     WHAT = arg1 \
>              args2
>   This allows for easy adding/deleting/reordering of lines when necessary without
>   disturbing other lines.

I tend to use "portable" make syntax but I can adapt in this case to
have something coherent with the GAR "style".

> - The package names in newer recipes tend to separate with "-" like
>   CSWemacs-nox instead of CSWemacsnox where additionally the catalog name can be
>   directly derived from the package name with CSW stripped and "-" replace by "_".
>   This is already the case as you define emacs_nox which explicit definition could
>   then be skipped.

I'll change the CSW names but that means that I must obsolete the old
packages, isn't it? Even though the catalog name doesn't change.

> - Use either a tabsize of 8 or no tabs at all with the exception of the leading tab
>   in rules. The current tabsize is hard to read:
>     http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/browser/csw/mgar/pkg/emacs/trunk/Makefile

I use real tabs and my editor has tab-stops at 4 characters. I don't
think that "untabifying" is a good thing in a make file. Anyway, by
writing verbose variable definition extensions, i.e. +=, will solve this
aesthetic issue.

Thank you again. I hope to finish tomorrow a first packaging for the new
version of Emacs.
-- 
Peter