| 1 |
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 17:50 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> > Then there are ebuilds that don't call eautoreconf, in the first |
| 4 |
> > place. Should we require that all of them inherit autotools now, |
| 5 |
> just |
| 6 |
> > for the unlikely case that user patches could be applied? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> If the aim is to provide a working feature to users, yes. The |
| 9 |
> alternative is to not provide user patches support. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Damnit, let the user shoot themself in the foot but let them learn from |
| 12 |
it. Remember back in the day when you had no clue? You learned from it. |
| 13 |
You can only protect them so much. If they want to use custom patches |
| 14 |
then they need to learn how. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
Homer Parker <hparker@g.o> |
Archives