1 |
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:39:50 -0400 |
2 |
Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Monday, August 23, 2010 12:24:54 Michał Górny wrote: |
5 |
> > The third revision, almost all suggestions applied. The ChangeLog: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> if there are suggestions you've actively ignored, those should be |
8 |
> noted |
9 |
|
10 |
I've replied to the specific suggestions but if you want, here's a |
11 |
short summary: |
12 |
- stripping ! from varname in use_scons() suggestion (I don't see a |
13 |
real point there as I replied you), |
14 |
- src_prepare() calling base_src_prepare() (it is better to inherit |
15 |
base within the specific ebuild), |
16 |
- src_install() calling base_src_install() (the base.eclass |
17 |
implementation calls make). |
18 |
|
19 |
> i'm not sure caching the value and using it in between runs is a good |
20 |
> idea. unless you also cache the thing you're caching and compare it |
21 |
> to make sure your cache is no longer invalid. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> i.e. export _SCONSOPTS_MAKEOPTS=${MAKEOPTS}, and then on every escons |
24 |
> invocation, make sure ${MAKEOPTS} hasnt changed in which case you |
25 |
> need to regenerate it. or just avoid the cache altogether and leave |
26 |
> SCONSOPTS as a hook specific to scons. |
27 |
|
28 |
Can do, though I don't see a reason why anyone would mangle MAKEOPTS in |
29 |
a middle of an ebuild using SCons. |
30 |
|
31 |
PS Why don't your mails contain 'Reply-To' header like others do? |
32 |
|
33 |
-- |
34 |
Best regards, |
35 |
Michał Górny |
36 |
|
37 |
<http://mgorny.alt.pl> |
38 |
<xmpp:mgorny@××××××.ru> |