1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:26:11 -0600 |
3 |
> Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
5 |
>>> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:54:34 -0800 |
6 |
>>> Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
>>>>> http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage/main/trunk/bin/isolated-functions.sh?r1=9118&r2=9140 |
8 |
>>>> Alright, so portage has put this stuff to stderr since January 4. |
9 |
>>>> Then why are we also adding workarounds to individual eclasses? |
10 |
>>> How many people are running a Portage version released after |
11 |
>>> January 4? |
12 |
>> Eventually, all of them. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> And until then, how many users are going to get things going weirdly |
15 |
> wrong if workarounds aren't added to everything using the code? |
16 |
> |
17 |
> I'd mutter something about EAPIs here, but really if people are having |
18 |
> difficulty understanding the necessity of the original commit, I |
19 |
> suspect it's a lost cause... |
20 |
> |
21 |
|
22 |
6 |
23 |
|
24 |
-- |
25 |
Doug Klima <cardoe@g.o> |
26 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~cardoe/ |
27 |
-- |
28 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |