| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:51:54 -0400
|
| 5 |
"Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" <zerochaos@g.o> wrote:
|
| 6 |
> I have a personal vendetta on this subject. Several eclasses set a |
| 7 |
> completely worthless description (and even more set a mostly worthless |
| 8 |
> DESCRIPTION) which ends up contaminating the DESCRIPTION for an ebuild |
| 9 |
> when inherit is done after DESCRIPTION is set. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/78813/
|
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> I realize that most of you will find this a little pedantic, however, |
| 14 |
> I find that needing to move my DESCRIPTION to below the inherit often |
| 15 |
> severely affects the readability of the ebuild, and all to avoid a |
| 16 |
> completely (or nearly) worthless DESCRIPTION from contaminating my |
| 17 |
> environment. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
You want your inherit line to be as near as the top as possible. The
|
| 20 |
only things you should have before the inherit line are EAPI and any
|
| 21 |
variables used by eclasses to determine behaviour.
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
- --
|
| 24 |
Ciaran McCreesh
|
| 25 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 26 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
iEYEARECAAYFAlBTmfcACgkQ96zL6DUtXhGzDgCcCn6mOes+8eswLl58ba6CBX4v
|
| 29 |
MisAoLNLzGivS6pDZHDF4YZv2poAY7K/
|
| 30 |
=/5qc
|
| 31 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives