1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> Having to write an ebuild just to install something in a package manager |
4 |
> friendly way and be able to uninstall it cleanly later is a defect |
5 |
|
6 |
No, this is exactly what ebuilds meant for: That the package manager |
7 |
keeps track of your package, and possibly also recompiles it in case |
8 |
of library upgrades. For this reason, ebuilds should essentially just |
9 |
consist of the commands which you would also type in the shell - this |
10 |
information *must* be provided (together with obviously some data like |
11 |
package name, slot-requests, and an otional description), but essentially |
12 |
that should be it. |
13 |
If it is more work or requires more knowledge to write an ebuild, then |
14 |
it is the ebuild concept which is defect. |