1 |
On 04/18/2012 11:34 AM, David Leverton wrote: |
2 |
> Zac Medico wrote: |
3 |
>> Also, maybe apply_user_patches_here should have a special return value |
4 |
>> if there are no patches to be applied? That way, src_prepare can avoid |
5 |
>> an eautoreconf call if there are no patches. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> Does that imply that every ebuild for an autotools-based package would |
8 |
> be expected to have an "apply_user_patches_here && eautoreconf" line, |
9 |
> just in case the user might want to add custom patches? It could be |
10 |
> exported by autotools.eclass, but even so, requiring every autotools |
11 |
> ebuild to inherit the eclass even if it doesn't have any effect by |
12 |
> default seems a bit unfortunate. |
13 |
|
14 |
Isn't that just a consequence of how autotools works? Do you have a |
15 |
better alternative? |
16 |
-- |
17 |
Thanks, |
18 |
Zac |