| 1 |
On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 17:08:02 +0200 |
| 2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> >>>>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> >> > It's better to have a function to obtain that directory rather than for |
| 7 |
> >> > ebuilds to hardcode it. |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> Why? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> > For better consistency, I'd say. Especially if we decide to fix Gentoo |
| 12 |
> > and start using the standard path, we'd need only to modify the eclass |
| 13 |
> > rather than all involved packages. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> But why should it be a function? Its return value is constant, so |
| 16 |
> a variable defined in the eclass seems more natural. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
To be honest, I was thinking the same thing when re-implementing |
| 19 |
the remaining functions. I can think of two reasons: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
1. consistency with other eclasses and functions like get_libdir, |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
2. possibility of using pkg-config if it becomes necessary. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Best regards, |
| 27 |
Michał Górny |
Archives