1 |
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> On 06/20/2012 06:19 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
3 |
>> |
4 |
>> On Tuesday 19 June 2012 22:46:26 Samuli Suominen wrote: |
5 |
>>> |
6 |
>>> On 06/15/2012 06:10 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
7 |
>>>> |
8 |
>>>> On Friday 15 June 2012 03:44:14 Samuli Suominen wrote: |
9 |
>>>>> |
10 |
>>>>> On 06/13/2012 06:02 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
11 |
>>>>>> |
12 |
>>>>>> i've noticed a growing trend where people put setup of variables into |
13 |
>>>>>> pkg_setup that only matter to src_* funcs presumably so they don't |
14 |
>>>>>> have |
15 |
>>>>>> to call the respective src_* func from an inherited eclass. |
16 |
>>>>>> unfortunately this adds pointless overhead to binpkgs. can we please |
17 |
>>>>>> move away from this practice ? |
18 |
>>>>> |
19 |
>>>>> |
20 |
>>>>> Every Xfce ebuild in gentoo-x86 is using pkg_setup() for 3 variables, |
21 |
>>>>> DOCS for src_install, PATCHES for src_prepare |
22 |
>>>> |
23 |
>>>> |
24 |
>>>> these are static variables, so defining them in a func is pointless |
25 |
>>> |
26 |
>>> |
27 |
>>> "sort of" not necessarily, 'has $useflag && PATCHES+=( )' has been used |
28 |
>>> before, not sure if it's used in tree right now or not |
29 |
>> |
30 |
>> |
31 |
>> as we've always said, USE conditional patches are to be highly discouraged |
32 |
> |
33 |
> |
34 |
> I agree BUT there are cases where it's OK to use conditional patching: |
35 |
> |
36 |
> For example, libfoo-0.1.1 is broken and is fixed in git for master which |
37 |
> will be in next release. The fix doesn't apply to 0.1.1 cleanly without |
38 |
> heavy modifications. |
39 |
> Then you would take the easiest possible route to get 0.1.1 working again, |
40 |
> with the comfort of knowing it's properly fixed for the next version. |
41 |
> |
42 |
> -Samuli |
43 |
> |
44 |
|
45 |
I assume you mean libfoo-0.1.1 is broken when USE=bar is enabled and |
46 |
you get a patch for that conditional case when USE=bar is enabled. |
47 |
|
48 |
Either way, the better solution is to mask it and have people use libfoo-0.1.0 |
49 |
|
50 |
-- |
51 |
Doug Goldstein |