Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:14:58
Message-Id: 20170320221443.7bf9c860@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424 by Ulrich Mueller
On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 20:25:52 +0100
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:

> >>>>> On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > What makes me wonder more are the proposed solutions: So far the > > only proposals I've seen are either inlining *all* the code or > > moving *all* the code into an eclass. Having a quick look at > > autoconf, it seems to me an intermediate solution would work > > perfectly fine for the above goals/rules: Put main.eblit into an > > eclass. The loading code then would access $FILESDIR only in src_* > > phases. This would likely work better for all parties and would > > allow to focus on better specifying this gray area of PMS instead. > > But is it desirable as a goal, that all packages in the tree use > regular eclasses, but two packages (autoconf and glibc) use something > else that is a "grey area"?
No. Unless I've missed something, in which case please point it out, main.eblit is generic enough to be an eclass and if called only from src_* phases, it gets the whole thing out of this grey area.