| 1 |
Le vendredi 10 août 2012 à 16:21 +0200, Jeroen Roovers a écrit : |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 14:03:23 +0200 |
| 3 |
> Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > Since you are proposing this, a side question is: |
| 6 |
> > Why should we write SRC_URI in ebuilds if that info is now available |
| 7 |
> > in metadata.xml ? (granted that we might still want to keep |
| 8 |
> > over-riding this information in ebuilds) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I was not suggesting to erase SRC_URI from all ebuilds but for things |
| 11 |
that have well defined rules like gnome packages, defining SRC_URI is |
| 12 |
mostly a useless excercise. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
5) The inversion of your question: Why should we start handling SRC_URI |
| 16 |
> outside ebuilds and eclasses? Or, how would that be practical, |
| 17 |
> advantageous, an improvement on the current situation. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I will add against my own question that eclasses currently handle this |
| 21 |
(see gnome.org eclass) very well. So maybe there is nothing to debate |
| 22 |
here :) |
Archives