| 1 |
On 04/18/2012 11:34 AM, David Leverton wrote: |
| 2 |
> Zac Medico wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Also, maybe apply_user_patches_here should have a special return value |
| 4 |
>> if there are no patches to be applied? That way, src_prepare can avoid |
| 5 |
>> an eautoreconf call if there are no patches. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Does that imply that every ebuild for an autotools-based package would |
| 8 |
> be expected to have an "apply_user_patches_here && eautoreconf" line, |
| 9 |
> just in case the user might want to add custom patches? It could be |
| 10 |
> exported by autotools.eclass, but even so, requiring every autotools |
| 11 |
> ebuild to inherit the eclass even if it doesn't have any effect by |
| 12 |
> default seems a bit unfortunate. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Isn't that just a consequence of how autotools works? Do you have a |
| 15 |
better alternative? |
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
Thanks, |
| 18 |
Zac |
Archives