| 1 |
I was goofing around trying to get current dev-vcs/git-9999 building |
| 2 |
by skipping the CVS patch ( which is applied with epatch ) and I had a |
| 3 |
bizzare amount of time working out how to get it working. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Looking at the source of eutils.eclass ' # Let people filter things |
| 6 |
dynamically ' suggests to me that this field is for use by a end user |
| 7 |
via package.env and friends. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
However, every time I ran emerge, the 'environment' file simply |
| 10 |
suggests that EPATCH_EXCLUDE was ="" . |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Looking elsewhere in eutils.eclass, I spied a forced initialization of |
| 13 |
EPATCH_EXCLUDE, which implicitly means you can't actually use this to |
| 14 |
exclude patches outside .ebuild |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Commenting this line out, yielded the result I had been expecting, the |
| 17 |
CVS patch being skipped . |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I only thought I could do this because I used something like this |
| 20 |
once upon a time with net-im/psi-9999 and thought it was just "normal" |
| 21 |
to be able to disable patches if I really wanted to. ( But I see now |
| 22 |
they acheive this by copying MY_EPATCH_EXCLUDE to EPATCH_EXCLUDE in |
| 23 |
the .ebuild ). |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
So, is this variable guarded against user tampering intentionally? It |
| 26 |
sure beats hacking the ebuild. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
( Side note, what would also be nice is some sort of warning if things |
| 29 |
you set in package.env are getting totally ignored. But thats a hard |
| 30 |
problem ) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Kent |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
perl -e "print substr( \"edrgmaM SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3, |
| 36 |
3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );" |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz |
Archives