| 1 |
On 10/27/2011 07:50 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 01:47, Ryan Hill wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:03:12 +0530 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> So, I honestly see no reason why toolchain should not start using EAPI 2. |
| 5 |
>> I await your patch to toolchain.eclass. :P |
| 6 |
> i wouldn't bother as it's most likely not going to be accepted at this time |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> (i haven't kept up-to-date with the hardened threads as i'm traveling atm) |
| 9 |
> -mike |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I wouldn't even worry about the hardened stuff right now, just getting |
| 13 |
toolchain.eclass EAPI>=2 would be a step forward. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Approaching this naively, can't we just set EAPI="2" in the eclass, see |
| 16 |
what breaks and fix? Or is it more involved because some EAPI="0" |
| 17 |
ebuilds would be inheriting it and we'd need a lot of if "${EAPI}" == 0 |
| 18 |
checks interspersed through the eclass? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
| 22 |
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
| 23 |
E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
| 24 |
GnuPG FP : 8040 5A4D 8709 21B1 1A88 33CE 979C AF40 D045 5535 |
| 25 |
GnuPG ID : D0455535 |
Archives