| 1 |
Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Indeed; different names could be given to different implementations of |
| 4 |
> the same thing, but that might completely kill the point of abstracting |
| 5 |
> it. |
| 6 |
> Maybe eclasses should die on unknown eapi; the fact is I really hate the |
| 7 |
> current way it's done when switching an ebuild to EAPI-2 which uses |
| 8 |
> an eclass that exports src_compile; most eclasses don't special case |
| 9 |
> eapi-2 yet and we end up running econf twice at best. I fear that'll be |
| 10 |
> the same with eapi-3, eapi-4, etc. (supposing that they'll support |
| 11 |
> src_configure too) |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
>> > An EXPORT_FUNCTIONS ignoring any function its doesn't know for its |
| 14 |
>> > eapi would help too. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
> Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 17 |
>> An EXPORT_FUNCTIONS ignoring incorrect usage makes one less place |
| 18 |
>> checking for eclass screwups... |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> yes; that's just a matter of choice though, but for eclasses it's |
| 21 |
> probably not luxury. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
Well it's simple enough to check (and give a QA warning) for unknown |
| 24 |
functions; adding a check for a specific string prefix (or to exclude a |
| 25 |
certain subset) in EXPORT_FUNCTIONS (based on current EAPI) is simple |
| 26 |
enough too. Is that what you mean? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
The behaviour to trigger could change eg for debug mode, or a repoman check. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I don't quite see how that deals with an eclass calling econf in its |
| 31 |
exported src_compile? Seems like EAPI versioning for eclasses (with |
| 32 |
implicit 0 only) is more what you're after for that issue (so the PM could |
| 33 |
suppress src_configure if src_compile is going to resolve to an EAPI-0 |
| 34 |
eclass function, although the inheritance stack might prove problematic.) |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Having to die for an unsupported EAPI seems like the wrong approach; if it's |
| 37 |
not going to work the PM shouldn't source it. If it can be made to work by |
| 38 |
filtering certain functions, that's doable. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
In the worst case, an ebuild switching to EAPI will require eclass |
| 41 |
maintenance; this is where the separation of elibs (useful code) and |
| 42 |
eclasses (template ebuilds) would be useful, although that needs versioning |
| 43 |
too. |
Archives