| 1 |
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 20:50:02 +0200 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > So the package manager is supposed to interact with an eclass |
| 4 |
> > function? That's pretty ugly. Why not just roll out a quick EAPI 5 |
| 5 |
> > that adds support for the "apply_user_patches_here" approach [1]? |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_c228be85e0c4e577ad194e6004d59062.xml |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> 1) Because it's ugly hack, |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Awww. You say that about everything with my name on it. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> 2) it will have to interact with epatch_user anyway (at least to avoid |
| 14 |
> applying patches twice), |
| 15 |
> 3) it will work only for new/modified ebuilds so won't differ at all |
| 16 |
> from using epatch_user(). |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Not if we kill epatch_user... Not like it works properly anyway, and |
| 19 |
it's better to have a "works properly or not at all" feature than one |
| 20 |
that breaks randomly. The package mangler could even make it fatal (at |
| 21 |
pretend time, no less) if someone wants to apply user patches to an |
| 22 |
ebuild whose EAPI doesn't support it. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives