| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 20/09/12 09:52 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 09:13:40 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius |
| 6 |
> <axs@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> PMS may not need to be fixed, just the spec |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> PMS is the spec, and it doesn't need fixing, since it accurately |
| 10 |
> reflects the situation we're dealing with. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Sorry, I misread PMS as PMs (portage, paludis, etc). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
And, for support to be official for ebuilds or eclasses to query IUSE |
| 16 |
(or other globals) within phase functions, then the 'spec' (PMS) is |
| 17 |
probably all that needs to be 'fixed'. Right? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
So, in EAPI=6, we propose something that'll make it official (ie a |
| 20 |
querying function; or ensure that PMs can provide these variables |
| 21 |
along with their proper 'effective' values, or their in-ebuild |
| 22 |
'explicit' values, or whatever it is we want to say can be relied |
| 23 |
upon, to the environment). |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 26 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAlBbJMgACgkQ2ugaI38ACPAlMQD+N9OqgJN8+LR7mir9my5Z7t/9 |
| 29 |
/3VzJvgozs47ybh3ZrUA/R6rca5Ts/lEn2FWVOpqcK9ajyD8pa9wHaKTzEXpq2+v |
| 30 |
=F0jI |
| 31 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives