| 1 |
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 25 May 2013 14:48:30 -0400 |
| 3 |
> Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> I'm wondering if we should create a more global function for calling |
| 6 |
>> ninja in a consistent way. Maybe we should introduce a NINJAOPTS |
| 7 |
>> variable for users to set in make.conf. Should we create a new eclass |
| 8 |
>> for this, or just stick it in eutils? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Is NINJAOPTS a variable recognized by ninja or something that would be Gentoo |
| 11 |
> specific? It'd be nice if you could parse out what you need from MAKEOPTS |
| 12 |
> instead, but I have no strong feelings. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I was thinking of something like a "eninja" function, which would call |
| 16 |
ninja ${NINJAOPTS}. But parsing MAKEOPTS would probably work just as |
| 17 |
well. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> If there's only two users in the tree right now I don't think an eclass is |
| 20 |
> warranted. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I can't really see ninja use really expanding too much. Maybe I will |
| 24 |
wait a while and see if it happens. |
Archives