1 |
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:47:03 +0100 |
2 |
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 15:27:12 +0300 Marius Mauch <genone@g.o> |
5 |
> wrote: |
6 |
> | Dan Meltzer wrote: |
7 |
> | > I can see the use for a category one, but I can see no point for a |
8 |
> | > package-local one, if you're going to have it specific for one |
9 |
> | > package, why not just put it in the ebuild, and have no eclass at |
10 |
> | > all? |
11 |
> | |
12 |
> | Actually I'd say the opposite: There is definitely a use for |
13 |
> | package-local eclasses, however I don't see the point for |
14 |
> | category-local eclasses (especially as that would very funny to get |
15 |
> | it working). Example for package-local eclasses? Whenever you define |
16 |
> | a function in an ebuild that isn't version specific. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> Category-specific: app-vim/eclass/vim-plugin.eclass |
19 |
> Package-specific: any package with a non-trivial build system that |
20 |
> doesn't change too much between versions. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> Making it work is 'easy', just make inherit first try /cat/pkg/eclass/ |
23 |
> then /cat/eclass/ then finally /eclass/ . |
24 |
|
25 |
well, /cat/eclass will bring us a lot of fun if implemented ;) |
26 |
|
27 |
Marius |
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub |
31 |
|
32 |
In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be |
33 |
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. |