| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Wednesday 07 June 2006 16:10, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 6 |
>> Grant Goodyear wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> Zac Medico wrote: [Wed Jun 07 2006, 01:30:38PM CDT] |
| 8 |
>>>> Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 9 |
>>>>> this is a *huge* con ... developers are lazy, *i'm* lazy ... i |
| 10 |
>>>>> certainly do not want to go through every single package i maintain |
| 11 |
>>>>> and add 'debug-build' to IUSE or 'inherit some-new-eclass' |
| 12 |
>>>> Sometimes it takes a little extra work to do things right, but |
| 13 |
>>>> hopefully it will pay off in the long run. A poor design decision |
| 14 |
>>>> made now can haunt us for years to come. |
| 15 |
>>> A "little extra work"? I'm pretty sure that such an eclass would be |
| 16 |
>>> required for better than half the tree (every package that contains some |
| 17 |
>>> C or C++). If almost everybody has to add the same piece of |
| 18 |
>>> boilerplate to their ebuilds, then perhaps a sane package manager should |
| 19 |
>>> be able to figure out what to do without the boilerplate. That |
| 20 |
>> It's a slippery slope when we start to incorporate special cases like that |
| 21 |
>> into a generic package manager. Where does it end? The same argument |
| 22 |
>> could be made again and again to add more special cases that further |
| 23 |
>> pollute the package manager. We already have a standard solution for cases |
| 24 |
>> such as this, and that is to share the specialized functionality via an |
| 25 |
>> eclass. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> the package maintainer provides some sane defaults ... the idea is for the |
| 28 |
> full configuration to be offloaded to the profiles |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
>> Well, I'd say that per-package environment variables would be a better way |
| 31 |
>> to implement per-package CFLAGS, CXXFLAGS, etc.. There is a patch attached |
| 32 |
>> to bug 44796 that implements this. Note that the debug-build.bashrc |
| 33 |
>> attached to my last post actually allows per-package debug-build via |
| 34 |
>> package.use. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> ok ? so what's stopping it from being integrated ? people want it ;) |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Is this question about per-package env, per-package debug-build, or |
| 39 |
both? In this thread, I've already posted a sample bashrc |
| 40 |
implementation of debug-build. Also, bug 44796 has a comment with a |
| 41 |
link to a bashrc implementation of per-package env: |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/143322 |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
The support already exists in portage for both of these. Either or |
| 46 |
both of them can be added to $PORTDIR/profiles/base/profile.bashrc |
| 47 |
and every package will inherit the functionality. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
Zac |
| 50 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 51 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
iD8DBQFEiAwA/ejvha5XGaMRAlXnAJ9yNx47G/ERA6/VLLH9CmKHOhmUeQCfUqK9 |
| 54 |
mWIvUdJihBDcXBQT0SsC8j4= |
| 55 |
=7d2s |
| 56 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 57 |
-- |
| 58 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives