| 1 |
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Mike Pagano <mpagano@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On 11/27/2016 09:06 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: |
| 5 |
>> On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Mike Pagano <mpagano@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> If kernel-2_src_unpack() is called in EAPI6, epatch_user() function |
| 7 |
>>> inherited from eutils.eclass is undefined. |
| 8 |
>>> See bug #579188 |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> kernel-2.eclass currently calls die in global scope for EAPI 6, so |
| 11 |
>> this change has no real effect. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> I would suggest modernizing the eclass before allowing it to be used |
| 14 |
>> with EAPI 6. For example, patches should be applied in src_prepare, |
| 15 |
>> not src_unpack. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Is this change not a step in the right direction? Or should it just be |
| 20 |
> one big bang? |
| 21 |
> All or nothing? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
A full patch series would make more sense than piecemeal commits I think. |
Archives