>>>>> On Mon, 7 May 2012, Michał Górny wrote:

> On Mon, 07 May 2012 12:19:40 -0400
> Michael Orlitzky <michael@...> wrote:

>> > After all, this functionality is just a stop-gap measure for users
>> > to apply quick bug fixes, so I don't expect that it will be used
>> > very often. Even fewer cases will require that eautoreconf is
>> > called. Do we really want to force developers to put this function
>> > call into every ebuild? That would be out of proportion, IMHO.
>> 
>> Only the ebuilds that override src_prepare (which is a lot).

> The reason for src_prepare() was to simplify ebuilds (so they don't
> have to override whole src_unpack()). Requiring a specific line in
> every src_prepare() call means going the other way.

+1

Also, if we add the feature to EAPI 5, we won't get anything close to
100% coverage for a very long time. (Looking at usage statistics, EAPI
2 was introduced almost 4 years ago, and about 30% of the tree are
still at EAPI 0 or 1.)

Couldn't the PM call a user-supplied script (which would be a file
with a special name placed in the same directory) after applying the
user patches? Since this script could do any postprocessing required,
applying user patches could be postponed until after src_prepare.

Ulrich