On Tuesday 24 of August 2010 10:30:12 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 19:36:50 +0200
> 
> Maciej Mrozowski <reavertm@...> wrote:
> > If SCons is unpredictable, then don't provide *any* phases and only
> > functions and rename it to scons-utils to match its purpose.
> 
> It is as predictable as the buildsystem meeting the default phase
> functions requirements -- we can configure it, compile it but no way of
> knowing what should be done in 'install' for sure.
> 
> > What I hate is deliberately introduced inconsistency in ebuild API's.
> 
> What I hate is replicating bad practices just because someone else did
> that before. If I'm wrong, then please point me the relation between
> a particular buildsystem and patching.

Ideologically there's none, but practically build system may need patching in 
eclass to fit Gentoo needs. And it's better to do it officially in eclass 
src_prepare phase than hack around elsewhere.
Either provide all buildsystem related phases or none - I'm already tired of 
playing "guess which phase from which eclass takes precedence when multiple 
inheritance is used" game.

-- 
regards
MM