Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: julian <julian.ospald@××××××××××.com>
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 18:45:17
Message-Id: 4FAEAF05.3010807@googlemail.com
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 05/12/2012 06:50 PM, 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/${PF}/examples" install > dodoc README > } > > So you are /forced/ to write entire src_install() while you only want to > append one argument to emake install. > > The current workaround for this is to use EXTRA_EMAKE from ebuild, but I > find this rather ugly (if not even forbidden by some PMS magic?) > > Can we make econf in src_configure, emake in src_compile, and emake > install in src_install accept arguments "$@" in EAPI=5, please? > > Relavent bug is http://bugs.gentoo.org/364343 > > - Samuli >
I find this a good idea and since it's optional it does not add unnecessary complexity.