Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: ulm@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal of accepting arguments to `default` in src_install (and more?) phases in EAPI=5 (for the next council meeting?)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 18:09:53
Message-Id: 20120512200924.3beafaa2@pomiocik.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal of accepting arguments to `default` in src_install (and more?) phases in EAPI=5 (for the next council meeting?) by Ulrich Mueller
On Sat, 12 May 2012 19:57:07 +0200
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:

> > The current workaround for this is to use EXTRA_EMAKE from ebuild, > > but I find this rather ugly (if not even forbidden by some PMS > > magic?) > > EXTRA_EMAKE isn't mentioned by the PMS. Do all package managers > support this variable? Portage does since 2004 at least.
EXTRA_EMAKE isn't supposed to be mentioned there. It's an internal use variable for users who need to pass something specific to make.
> > Can we make econf in src_configure, emake in src_compile, and emake > > install in src_install accept arguments "$@" in EAPI=5, please? > > I'd rather document EXTRA_EMAKE and EXTRA_ECONF in the spec, either > retroactively (in case all package managers support these variables > already), or for EAPI 5. It would accomplish the same as your > proposal, even without the need to add an explicit src_install > function.
As above. Otherwise, we'll end up reimplementing just another variable to let users pass their custom arguments. -- Best regards, Michał Górny

Attachments

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

Replies