| 1 |
On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 14:28:34 +0200 |
| 2 |
Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> So I know a bunch of people have already looked at it, and I'd like to |
| 5 |
> know: what do you find better about the Ruby approach compared to the |
| 6 |
> Python approach? Is it just the size of python.eclass, or are there a |
| 7 |
> number of other issues? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Working targets. USE_PYTHON is junk. What python.eclass does now with |
| 10 |
ABIs is a PITA, and requires manually providing a lot of redudant |
| 11 |
information (namely, RESTRICT_PYTHON_ABIS). |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Right now, each ebuild has to provide the same information in |
| 14 |
PYTHON_DEPEND and RESTRICT_PYTHON_ABIS. Moreover, if an ebuild |
| 15 |
supports, say, py3 and its dependency doesn't, the ebuild has to |
| 16 |
restrict py3 too. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I'd like to see that fixed somehow. I'd like to set a single supported |
| 19 |
Python version information in an ebuild, and let the dependency |
| 20 |
resolver handle everything else. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Best regards, |
| 24 |
Michał Górny |
Archives