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: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 11:47:48
Message-Id: 4FDC708B.10909@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild laziness and binpkg overhead by Gilles Dartiguelongue
On 06/16/2012 01:05 PM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> Le vendredi 15 juin 2012 à 21:04 +0200, Pacho Ramos a écrit : >> El vie, 15-06-2012 a las 09:03 +0200, Pacho Ramos escribió: >>> El mar, 12-06-2012 a las 23:02 -0400, Mike Frysinger escribió: >>>> 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 ? >>>> >>>> i've seen this with a good number of the GNOME packages like: > > [...] > > This is most likely historic and reading the eclasses, I see no use of > G2CONF that would forbid working from src_configure. > > I guess the pratice emerged from not wanting to write > gnome2_src_configure all the timebut if there is a reason (like the one > you exposed) to do it this way, then it'll become our new standard > pratice :)
That is a quite bottleneck, at least for me. I don't think this issue is solvable without creating an new function to pass the vars across functions (phases) that has no existing content that would require calling itself at the end, like for example, src_setup()