On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 05:07:21PM +0100, Steve Long wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 17:38:11 +0200
> > Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
> >> > By the way, do we really want to special case eapi-2 in every
> >> > eclass ? That's lot of code duplication and will get even worse
> >> > when we'll reach eapi-42. That would have been cool to have a pm
> >> > function that tells "has my eapi foo support" but that sort of
> >> > bites its tail that way.
> >> 
> >> Hm, what about:
> >> [ "$(type -t src_configure)" == function ] && EXPORT_FUNCTIONS
> >> src_configure
> >> 
> >> Or is this too fragile or trying to be too clever?
> > 
> > It's illegal, according to PMS. It also won't work with Paludis, since
> > phase function definitions aren't made available until just before that
> > phase executes (there is a reason for this -- it provides us with a way
> > of identifying whether a package has a particular phase or not).
> > 
> That seems a bit implementation-specific; how one alternative package
> manager generates that metadata isn't important (though it does seem odd
> that you think it has to be done at that point) nor should it get in the
> way.

Actually both alternative PM's do this now (>=pkgcore-0.4.7.9), 
although in pkgcore's case the default phase functions are installed 
after sourcing rather then at the time of invocation.

Long term, this is the correct way to go imo- the downside to it is 
that a common sourcing env needs be defined at some point (newdepend, 
newrdepend, etc) to avoid any question of what's available.

~brian