1 |
On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:49:17 +0100 |
2 |
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:36:41 -0400 |
5 |
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> > On Monday 29 April 2013 01:55:49 Michał Górny wrote: |
7 |
> > > Now, what are your thoughts? Shall we fix PMS to explicitly state |
8 |
> > > the argument order or implement ugly hacks in ebuilds? |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > portage has always inserted implicit args before the args given by |
11 |
> > the ebuild to econf. PMS omitting the ordering information is simply |
12 |
> > an oversight to be clarified, not functionality that may be relied |
13 |
> > upon. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> As you can see in the bug, we're not discussing anything related to EAPI |
16 |
> 0 behaviour, so this argument is irrelevant. We're discussing a change |
17 |
> in a later EAPI, where the change had nothing to say about ordering. |
18 |
|
19 |
There's a difference between 'we' and 'you alone'. |
20 |
|
21 |
-- |
22 |
Best regards, |
23 |
Michał Górny |