Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild laziness and binpkg overhead
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 02:52:22
Message-Id: 4FE13982.8070309@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild laziness and binpkg overhead by Mike Frysinger
On 06/15/2012 06:10 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 15 June 2012 03:44:14 Samuli Suominen wrote: >> On 06/13/2012 06:02 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>> i've noticed a growing trend where people put setup of variables into >>> pkg_setup that only matter to src_* funcs presumably so they don't have >>> to call the respective src_* func from an inherited eclass. >>> unfortunately this adds pointless overhead to binpkgs. can we please >>> move away from this practice ? >> >> Every Xfce ebuild in gentoo-x86 is using pkg_setup() for 3 variables, >> DOCS for src_install, PATCHES for src_prepare > > these are static variables, so defining them in a func is pointless
"sort of" not necessarily, 'has $useflag && PATCHES+=( )' has been used before, not sure if it's used in tree right now or not
> >> and XFCONF for src_configure > > now you're down to one variable which means you've got one func to /properly/ > define
src_configure() still requires calling itself (xfconf_src_configure) in the end of the function someone suggested writing, for example, xfconf() function that accepts $@ arguments so you could src_configure() { xfconf \ $(use_enable foo) } but I don't really like that either... src_setup() would be cool and solve all the forementioned issues -Samuli

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild laziness and binpkg overhead Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>