Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 17:38:11 +0200
> Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
>> > By the way, do we really want to special case eapi-2 in every
>> > eclass ? That's lot of code duplication and will get even worse
>> > when we'll reach eapi-42. That would have been cool to have a pm
>> > function that tells "has my eapi foo support" but that sort of
>> > bites its tail that way.
>> 
>> Hm, what about:
>> [ "$(type -t src_configure)" == function ] && EXPORT_FUNCTIONS
>> src_configure
>> 
>> Or is this too fragile or trying to be too clever?
> 
> It's illegal, according to PMS. It also won't work with Paludis, since
> phase function definitions aren't made available until just before that
> phase executes (there is a reason for this -- it provides us with a way
> of identifying whether a package has a particular phase or not).
> 
That seems a bit implementation-specific; how one alternative package
manager generates that metadata isn't important (though it does seem odd
that you think it has to be done at that point) nor should it get in the
way.