| 1 |
On Wednesday 18 July 2012 12:18:35 Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:33 PM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > > "epatch" is so widely used and basic that I wonder why it's still not |
| 4 |
> > > implemented as a real helper function. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Because then its harder to change, it must be in PMS, otherwise you |
| 7 |
> > have to do things like test which version of epatch the package |
| 8 |
> > manager provides....sounds a lot like EAPI :) |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> You know, that's actually a pretty good case *for* base.eclass, |
| 11 |
> eutils.eclass and similar... we should probably move more functions |
| 12 |
> there... :D |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
i don't see how base vs eutils eclass here makes a difference |
| 15 |
-mike |
Archives