Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] [PATCH] Correct the definition of ESYSROOT as EPREFIX isn't always applicable

[James Le Cuirot]

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 14:05:10 +0200
Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote:

> There seems to be unneeded whitespace only changes here that make the
> diff less readable

Sorry about that. I've only changed one cell in that table.

> Admittedly without a full understanding of the problem, but this looks
> wrong to me: SYSROOT, EPREFIX and BROOT are only relevant in build
> phases (src_*); (EPREFIX is a little special here but mostly for
> convenience). ROOT is only relevant in pkg_* phases. I don't see how
> this can work. Say I build a binpkg with ROOT=/ then use that binpkg
> with ROOT=/somewhere, you can't go back and change SYSROOT.

ROOT is used to determine ESYSROOT, not the other way around. As you
say, (E)SYSROOT is only relevant in src phases so it doesn't matter if
ROOT has changed when installing a binpkg.

I take your point that setting a src phase variable based on a pkg
phase variable seems odd but we're only using ROOT to determine the
applicable prefix. We're not taking the actual value of ROOT. When
Portage works all this out, it has access to all the necessary
variables. It only filters the variables based on the phase function
later on.

> Also, I think the wording could be more "programmatic" (if ... then
> ESYSROOT is ... else ... ) to avoid confusion.

Given that there are three clauses, I thought that using "respectively"
would be shorter and clearer but I'll try some other wording to see how
it looks.

-- 
James Le Cuirot (chewi)
Gentoo Linux Developer