| 1 |
On 10/31/2011 12:37 AM, Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 10/30/2011 10:33 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 27.10.2011 2.40, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> i can't see any ebuild/eclass using egethome, egetshell, |
| 5 |
>>> is-login-disabled from portability.eclass. anyone have a reason |
| 6 |
>>> for keeping these before i punt them ? -mike |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
>> Breaking overlays. Isn't the standing policy still to not break |
| 10 |
>> backwards compatibility as long as an eclass exists? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>> Regards, Petteri |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> We have no have direct control on overlays. It is up to maintainers to |
| 16 |
> ensure that their packages work with portage eclasses or they can have |
| 17 |
> their own eclasses locally. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
There could be an deprecation warning that the functions are going away |
| 20 |
to be nice with overlay maintainers but there is no requirement for such |
| 21 |
thing far as I'm aware. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Punt away. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
- Samuli |
Archives