| 1 |
On August 18, 2014 11:11:56 AM EDT, "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
>Dnia 2014-08-18, o godz. 09:22:46 |
| 3 |
>Chris Reffett <creffett@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> On 8/18/2014 8:56 AM, hasufell wrote: |
| 6 |
>> > Almost forgot, of course this does not work if you expect |
| 7 |
>> > unpacker_src_unpacker() to run: |
| 8 |
>> > inherit unpacker games base |
| 9 |
>> > |
| 10 |
>> > as well as |
| 11 |
>> > inherit unpacker base games |
| 12 |
>> > |
| 13 |
>> > however |
| 14 |
>> > inherit games unpacker base |
| 15 |
>> > |
| 16 |
>> > will work. |
| 17 |
>> > |
| 18 |
>> > And now... guess why the games herd made it a policy to always |
| 19 |
>inherit |
| 20 |
>> > games.eclass last. Because of the unpredictability of eclasses and |
| 21 |
>that |
| 22 |
>> > they may randomly add exported phase functions. It's a bit |
| 23 |
>paranoid, but |
| 24 |
>> > understandable, since we don't have any real rules here. |
| 25 |
>> > |
| 26 |
>> > So in the end 3 eclasses all tell you "inherit me last! really!". |
| 27 |
>Good |
| 28 |
>> > luck with figuring out how to make a gnome game with python and |
| 29 |
>multilib |
| 30 |
>> > support work together. I can predict the days such a review would |
| 31 |
>take |
| 32 |
>> > in #gentoo-sunrise. Not less than 3. |
| 33 |
>> > |
| 34 |
>> Would it be feasible to add a repoman check for situations like this, |
| 35 |
>> where the behavior of a phase is dependent on inherit order? If so, |
| 36 |
>it |
| 37 |
>> seems reasonable to me to require explicit calls to eclass functions |
| 38 |
>in |
| 39 |
>> these cases to make it clear what's being called when. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
>Right now, we have no kind of repoman for eclasses. If you have time to |
| 42 |
>work on such a thing, please do. Otherwise, all we can do is put more |
| 43 |
>checks in ebuilds but that triggers the warning for the wrong people... |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
I was thinking more ebuild-side. Example: my ebuild inherits both cmake-utils and games eclasses, and I don't explicitly define src_compile, repoman full could pop up a warning like "src_compile is ambiguous between cmake-utils_src_compile and games_src_compile, please explicitly define this phase and call the appropriate eclass function." I imagine that this would pop up a lot of warnings, but I feel like it would improve readability and make it explicit what should be going on where. I concede that it could make a lot more boilerplate code in ebuilds, so that's a potential issue, mostly just throwing out an idea here. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Chris Reffett |
Archives