| 1 |
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Ciaran McCreesh |
| 2 |
<ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:49:25 +0200 |
| 4 |
> René Neumann <lists@××××××.eu> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> I'd like just to receive a short clarification about the 'status' of |
| 6 |
>> base.eclass: Is this eclass expected to be available everywhere, i.e. |
| 7 |
>> should each eclass make sure it imports and incorporates it. Or is it |
| 8 |
>> just an eclass like the others and ebuilds should make sure they |
| 9 |
>> inherit it if needed? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> base.eclass is a historical mistake, from before the design of eclasses |
| 12 |
> was fully figured out and moved into the package manager. Unfortunately, |
| 13 |
> rather than letting it die, people keep putting things in it and using |
| 14 |
> it... |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I think it would be a good idea to remove the second sentence of the |
| 17 |
description, which is clearly false. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
# @DESCRIPTION: |
| 20 |
# The base eclass defines some default functions and variables. Nearly |
| 21 |
# everything else inherits from here. |
Archives