| 1 |
On Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 23:14:24 +0100 |
| 3 |
> There is no way for an eclass to throw an error. Nor, with the current |
| 4 |
> way Portage implements EAPI, is there a way to add such a way. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
It's not perfect, but |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
<eclass>_pkg_setup() { |
| 9 |
something_wrong && die |
| 10 |
} |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
should work reasonably well. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> It's in PMS. svn co http://svn.repogirl.net/pms for a copy. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Right. But when you think every dev will read the PMS to find out what's fine |
| 18 |
to do and what not for N++ EAPIs again and again, while he wants only a short |
| 19 |
list of do's and don'ts, your bathing temperature is far above average. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
What I do think - and no, I won't read this rediculous large |
| 22 |
category/ebuild-x.y-rN-my.local.version-too-much-coffein-drinks.ebuild-epaiN-anyone-else-with-a-stupid-idea |
| 23 |
thread - is, that EPAI changes and there implications apparently have not |
| 24 |
been well thought out and the best we can do is to ensure there are as few |
| 25 |
eclass/ebuild-relating differing EAPIs as possible. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Carsten |
Archives