>>>>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:44:36 +0200
> Ulrich Mueller <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I disagree with this. As it is currently worded, every ebuild would
>> be required to call a special function in src_prepare. This is the
>> worst possible solution, IMHO.
> Every ebuild that defines its own src_prepare, yes. That's the
> point: the package mangler can't know where to apply patches itself
> otherwise, and user patches are rare enough that developers are very
> likely to forget to check if they aren't made to.
Right, user patches are rare, and patches that change the build system
such that eautoreconf is necessary are even rarer.
I'd say that EAPI 5 should provide an "apply_patches_here" function
that can be called by ebuilds, but if the ebuild hasn't called the
function, then it should fall back to applying user patches just after
> We had this discussion in the original thread. If we're just looking
> for a feature that "might work sometimes", there's no point sticking
> any of this in the EAPI at all.
I don't see why the above wouldn't work. The user still has complete
control, because he can always patch (e.g.) configure along with
Then there are ebuilds that don't call eautoreconf, in the first
place. Should we require that all of them inherit autotools now, just
for the unlikely case that user patches could be applied?