Archives
Archives
| From: | Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o> | ||
| Cc: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Shall econf append its arguments to end of ./configure invocation? | ||
| Date: | Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:17:51 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20130429201740.4dcb76d4@googlemail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Shall econf append its arguments to end of ./configure invocation? by "Michał Górny" |
||
| 1 | On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:09:36 +0200 |
| 2 | Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 | > > As you can see in the bug, we're not discussing anything related to |
| 4 | > > EAPI 0 behaviour, so this argument is irrelevant. We're discussing |
| 5 | > > a change in a later EAPI, where the change had nothing to say about |
| 6 | > > ordering. |
| 7 | > |
| 8 | > There's a difference between 'we' and 'you alone'. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | Well yes, you're trying to ignore the actual issue and go around |
| 11 | retroactively breaking things rather than just change the wording in |
| 12 | EAPI 6. But that doesn't change the fact that the actual bug in the |
| 13 | ebuild wouldn't be showing up if it were EAPI 0. |
| 14 | |
| 15 | -- |
| 16 | Ciaran McCreesh |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Shall econf append its arguments to end of ./configure invocation? | Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> |