On 03/07/2010 08:36 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Sunday 07 March 2010 13:31:56 Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 03/07/2010 07:42 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Saturday 06 March 2010 02:11:15 Petteri Räty wrote:
>>>> On 03/05/2010 08:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>>> sometimes i have optional patches (ignoring the "patches should always
>>>>> be applied") where autotools should be run.  always inheriting
>>>>> autotools is currently annoying because it always adds the related
>>>>> dependencies.  USE based inherits are obviously out.
>>>>>
>>>>> so unless there's some burgeoning standard i'm not aware of, below is
>>>>> what i have in mind.  packages set AUTOTOOLS_AUTO_DEPEND to "no" before
>>>>> inheriting autotools.eclass and that allows them to put
>>>>> ${AUTOTOOLS_DEPEND} behind a USE flag in their own DEPEND string.
>>>>
>>>> What we use in Java is JAVA_PKG_OPT_USE to declare what use flag the
>>>> DEPENDs should be under. This approach doesn't allow the ebuild
>>>> maintainer to forget adding the depends.
>>>
>>> i'm more inclined towards Jonathan's opinion, so ive kept the proposed
>>> behavior (plus a fix from Torsten).
>>
>> And what about my latest response to him?
> 
> considering your proposal saves ${FOO} in DEPEND, it hasnt changed my opinion
> -mike

Why would it be better to require ebuild writers to have do it
themselves instead of the eclass automatically taking care of it?

Regards,
Petteri