Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Carsten Lohrke <carlo@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: The big eclasses massacre
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:41:15
Message-Id: 200411072241.01980.carlo@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: The big eclasses massacre by Patrick Lauer
1 On Sunday 07 November 2004 22:12, Patrick Lauer wrote:
2 >Also, what happens if someone uses an overlay with a
3 > better/newer/older eclass version? As long as there is no distinction
4 > between versions, I can imagine lots of *ahem* interesting problems that
5 > could be avoided.
6
7 Um, you should rename (e.g. datecode) it, if you put it in your overlay.
8 User's overlay is nothing we have to care about. If you want to be absolutely
9 safe, then use a snapshot, otherwise live with it, that Gentoo is a moving
10 target. I can't see a benefit in eclass versioning, that outweighs the added
11 maintenance overhead. If a new eclass is really needed, then it's always
12 possible to add one, anyways. All eclasses have to be compatible to all
13 ebuilds in the Portage tree, if not, open a bug report.
14
15
16 Carsten

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: The big eclasses massacre Andres Loeh <kosmikus@g.o>