1 |
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 4:15 AM, Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> Sort of responding to/being inspired by haubi's comment on -dev about |
3 |
> "inherit eapi 4", I wondered whether we should make a prefix.eclass. |
4 |
> |
5 |
> Currently we have eprefixify as function provided by Portage, and hence |
6 |
> ebuilds that use eprefixify cannot be straight ported to gentoo-x86. |
7 |
> Most notable are the eselect-* ebuilds that some gentoo-x86 devs like to |
8 |
> give full Prefix support, but simply can't because eprefixify (which we |
9 |
> would use) cannot be used in gentoo-x86. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> So, should we start an eclass with for now eprefixify in there, and for |
12 |
> every ebuild where we use it, start inheriting prefix and nuke the |
13 |
> function from Portage? Somehow I think this is a good idea. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Since I like haubi's idea about inherit doing the magic for eapis, |
16 |
> perhaps this can even solve the problem we have with our EAPI mungling |
17 |
> (all our ebuilds just inherit eapi prefix to "tag" them) and all |
18 |
> eclasses (it remains a hell of a job to keep it working), as well as |
19 |
> having prefix ebuilds live happily next to non-prefix ones. But for |
20 |
> that we really need Portage to be able to mask based on what's in the |
21 |
> inherit line, e.g. the resolver needs to take it into account. |
22 |
|
23 |
I'm not opposed to the idea and to be quite frank, we need a better |
24 |
solution than EAPI=prefix which a) will not be allowed in gentoo-x86 |
25 |
purely based on name[1], b) breaks on every EAPI bump[2], c) is not a |
26 |
legal use of EAPI anymore[3] |
27 |
|
28 |
[1]: PMS says that Gentoo can only use numbers (as strings) for EAPI |
29 |
names. [citation needed, but I know it is true] |
30 |
[2]: EAPI=prefix extends every EAPI so its a poor choice to be called |
31 |
an EAPI. Some additional options include PROPERTIES=prefix - which is |
32 |
restrictable, and other brainstorming that I forgot atm. |
33 |
[3]: see [2]. initially, EAPI=prefix was thought to be a good use of |
34 |
EAPI's but I don't think that is true anymore. |
35 |
|
36 |
-Jeremy |