| 1 |
On 23:35 Sun 08 Mar , Tiziano Müller wrote: |
| 2 |
> Well, the point I'm trying to make here is a different one: The syntax |
| 3 |
> you proposed is more to write but still equivalent to the one using |
| 4 |
> vars. And looking at the ebuilds - taking G2CONF as an example - it |
| 5 |
> seems that people don't have a problem with putting their config |
| 6 |
> options into vars. And furthermore with your syntax you still have to |
| 7 |
> write out "econf $(use_with ...)" explicitly while adding it the |
| 8 |
> conf-vars to a var (as proposed) makes the complete src_configure |
| 9 |
> function obsolete, allows the usage of the default |
| 10 |
> src_configure/src_compile/src_install (see |
| 11 |
> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_17e6ae8082aeb762fd01ba7307457789.xml |
| 12 |
> for example) and is therefore even shorter to write. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I think the idea of ebuilds as scripts showing directly how to build |
| 15 |
software is a core part of the Gentoo build-system philosophy. This |
| 16 |
proposal pushes ebuilds toward a formatted file that is not a script. |
| 17 |
Instead, it is more like an Ant XML file that more abstractly describes |
| 18 |
a build. I think this is the wrong direction for ebuilds because they |
| 19 |
should directly resemble how software is built by hand. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
One of the key reasons people use Gentoo is that ebuilds are so easy to |
| 22 |
"get" for anyone who has ever built software by hand. I will continue to |
| 23 |
vehemently defend anything that I think retains this key advantage of |
| 24 |
Gentoo over other distributions. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Thanks, |
| 28 |
Donnie |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Donnie Berkholz |
| 31 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 32 |
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com |
Archives