1 |
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 16:53:04 +0800 |
2 |
Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On 04/15/12 16:16, Ryan Hill wrote: |
5 |
> > Right now we have support in some packages for user patches - those being |
6 |
> > patches dropped into /etc/portage/patches/pkgname/ - which are automatically |
7 |
> > applied. Because this feature is implemented by epatch_user() in |
8 |
> > eutils.eclass, it is only available for ebuilds that inherit eutils and |
9 |
> > explicitly call epatch_user or inherit another eclass that calls it in an |
10 |
> > exported phase (eg. base). The end result is a very inconsistent experience, |
11 |
> > where user patches may or may not work not only on a package-by-package |
12 |
> > basis, but ebuild-by-ebuild. |
13 |
> > |
14 |
> > Is there any reason why this couldn't just be done in the package manager, |
15 |
> > making user patches available for all ebuilds without code changes? |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> |
18 |
> From a debugging / bug wrangling perspective it's bad because there's no |
19 |
> way for me to see if someone accidentally patched in something |
20 |
> unexpected. (And we do have creative users :) ) |
21 |
> |
22 |
> It's a neat feature, but I'm moderately opposed to it unless we can get |
23 |
> reporting in place so I can definitely see (e.g. from a logfile or error |
24 |
> message) that there's been some ebuild modifications. |
25 |
|
26 |
For an advanced user it's already just a matter of adding |
27 |
|
28 |
post_src_prepare() { |
29 |
epatch_user |
30 |
} |
31 |
|
32 |
to '/etc/portage/bashrc' and screw thing up, right? |
33 |
|
34 |
eutils.eclass:epatch_user() could be more noisy (ewarn?) when |
35 |
applies user patches. That way you could easier see something |
36 |
odd happening in build.log. |
37 |
|
38 |
-- |
39 |
|
40 |
Sergei |