Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2012-06-12
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2012 06:02:53
Message-Id: 4FCAD95A.9010903@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2012-06-12 by Samuli Suominen
1 On 06/03/2012 06:20 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
2 > On 06/03/2012 03:01 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
3 >>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2012, Samuli Suominen wrote:
4 >>
5 >>>> On 05/29/2012 10:09 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
6 >>> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_920c6d6daafe7702bfa3b8a2bc21e0c1.xml
7 >>>
8 >>
9 >>>> Can you indicate what the council has to vote on/decide for this one?
10 >>
11 >>> EAPI=5
12 >>
13 >>> optional: "$@" placement in default for src_configure()
14 >>
15 >>> econf "$@"
16 >>
17 >>> optional: "$@" placement in default for src_compile()
18 >>
19 >>> emake "$@"
20 >>
21 >> I still don't see the point of it. econf or emake could just be called
22 >> directly. We won't gain anything by allowing arguments, but only
23 >> complicate things.
24 >>
25 >>> this one is what I'm really after for:
26 >>
27 >>> default for src_install() in EAPI=5 should accept "$@" in correct place
28 >>> to avoid usage of EXTRA_EMAKE within ebuilds/eclasses and to avoid
29 >>> duplicating the Portage code for DOCS.
30 >>> NOTE: When this was last voted on for EAPI=3, we didn't have this DOCS
31 >>> handling, and this wasn't important yet.
32 >>
33 >>> emake DESTDIR="${D}" "$@" install
34 >>
35 >> Again, this could be called directly, which has the advantage that it
36 >> makes it obvious that src_install isn't the default.
37 >
38 > The difference is working the tree when you have to alter ebuilds which
39 > have been written like:
40 >
41 > DOCS=( AUTHORS README.NOW "${FILESDIR}"/README.Gentoo )
42 >
43 > src_install() {
44 > default
45 >
46 > echo "Some command here."
47 > }
48 >
49 > At this point you have to move content of DOCS which may or may not rely
50 > on the ""quoting with array"". Remove the call to default. And then
51 > duplicate the EAPI=4 default into the ebuild.
52 >
53 > And then replicate that every month dozen times and keep on doing it for
54 > some months. Get frustrated.
55 >
56 > If that's not enough, then you get all excited about EAPI=4 and finally
57 > think you have a replacement for base.eclass to port xfconf.eclass away
58 > from the thing when you only used it for default src_install() to avoid
59 > code duplication...
60 >
61 > Think you are all done, and then get complainment that support for extra
62 > arguments for xfconf_src_install was killed, and was required for things
63 > like:
64 >
65 > xfconf_src_install htmldirectory=/usr/share/doc/${PF}/html
66 > imagesdir=/usr/share/doc/${PF}/html/images
67 >
68 > Where sedding the build system runs maintainer mode at .in level, and
69 > runnning autotools (.am level) requires heavy documentation dependencies.
70 > You go back to base.eclass and get frustrated more.
71 >
72 > I hope that clears things up ;-)
73 >
74
75 Also, if not implemented, what is the replacement for EXTRA_EMAKE which
76 we are allowed to use from ebuilds? Or are we allowed to use it? I think
77 PMS didn't forbid it the last time I checked and it has consumers in
78 tree already.
79
80 And if not implemented, would the council please vote on banning the
81 usage of `default` in src_install() directly from ebuilds? The syntax
82 back and forth converting MUST stop.
83
84 - Samuli

Replies