Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal of accepting arguments to `default` in src_install (and more?) phases in EAPI=5 (for the next council meeting?)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 17:58:03
Message-Id: 20398.42099.258387.30470@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Proposal of accepting arguments to `default` in src_install (and more?) phases in EAPI=5 (for the next council meeting?) by Samuli Suominen
>>>>> On Sat, 12 May 2012, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Example, > - Package is using autotools. > - The default phase like below works for the package:
> src_install() { > emake DESTDIR="${D}" install > dodoc README > }
> So when writing a new ebuild you would only add:
> DOCS="README"
> And be done with it. Then the next version of the package needs extra > argument passed to emake install, for example:
> src_install() { > emake DESTDIR="${D}" init_d_path="/usr/share/doc/${PF}/examples" install > dodoc README > }
> So you are /forced/ to write entire src_install() while you only want to > append one argument to emake install.
> The current workaround for this is to use EXTRA_EMAKE from ebuild, but I > find this rather ugly (if not even forbidden by some PMS magic?)
EXTRA_EMAKE isn't mentioned by the PMS. Do all package managers support this variable? Portage does since 2004 at least.
> Can we make econf in src_configure, emake in src_compile, and emake > install in src_install accept arguments "$@" in EAPI=5, please?
I'd rather document EXTRA_EMAKE and EXTRA_ECONF in the spec, either retroactively (in case all package managers support these variables already), or for EAPI 5. It would accomplish the same as your proposal, even without the need to add an explicit src_install function. Ulrich

Replies