| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:01:41 +0200 |
| 3 |
> Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> If we go with this solution then I guess eclasses must check for the |
| 5 |
>> EAPI variable and then act accordingly. For example if the ebuild sets |
| 6 |
>> EAPI=2 and the eclass is designed for EAPI=1 then it could be made to |
| 7 |
>> die in case EAPI 2 is not backwards compatible. The main reason for me |
| 8 |
>> asking this it that I plan to make the java eclasses use the EAPI 1 |
| 9 |
>> features. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Neither EAPI 0 nor EAPI 1 provide any mechanism for an ebuild to 'die' |
| 12 |
> at global scope. There's simply no way for eclasses to complain that |
| 13 |
> they're being misused. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Well nothing formal but the ebuild developer should pick up ewarn/echo |
| 17 |
/whatever messages coming from global scope. That's what we have in |
| 18 |
debug.eclass atm. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Regards, |
| 21 |
Petteri |
Archives