| 1 |
On 09/01/2011 07:48 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hello, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Our bash-completion.eclass is awful and ugly. I'm not even talking |
| 5 |
> about flags and stuff now but dobashcompletion() itself. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> That function doesn't follow do*() argument scheme; it matches rather |
| 8 |
> one used by new*() funcs. Sadly, a number of ebuilds is using that |
| 9 |
> scheme to rename installed file. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Furthermore, it uses two eclass variables to switch the behavior. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> BASHCOMPFILES allows it to install multiple files (but works only if no |
| 14 |
> arguments are passed). |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> BASHCOMPLETION_NAME renames the installed file (if BASHCOMPFILES is not |
| 17 |
> used) and makes it ignore the second argument. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> I think the way to go would be to reimplement it completely. Maybe just |
| 20 |
> put dobashcomp() and newbashcomp() functions in eutils (to not collide) |
| 21 |
> and deprecate bash-completion.eclass? |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
De-facto maintainer signing off, your ideas have been read and |
| 25 |
well-accepted by myself. Carry on as you see fit, IMO. |
| 26 |
-Jeremy |
Archives