Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Martin Schlemmer <azarah@g.o>
To: vapier@g.o
Cc: Gentoo-Dev <gentoo-dev@g.o>, Nick Jones <carpaski@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Some 'proper coding' notes for ebuilds
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 15:30:27
Message-Id: 1059924636.8312.24.camel@nosferatu.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Some 'proper coding' notes for ebuilds by Mike Frysinger
1 On Sun, 2003-08-03 at 04:38, Mike Frysinger wrote:
2 > oooooooooh and stop trying to run the `patch` cmd yourself ...
3 >
4 > no one is cooler than `epatch` (which is integrated into portage now, so dont
5 > 'inherit eutils'), so stop trying to think you ppl are
6 >
8 On a side note: The whole idea of having epatch, etc in a eclass,
9 and not portage, was to be able to propagate fixes without a need
10 for a new portage. If it really needs to be inside portage, can
11 portage just automatically inherit eutils.eclass (or whatever),
12 and not hardcode it ?
15 --
17 Martin Schlemmer
18 Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
19 Cape Town, South Africa


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature