Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 3's default src_install needs bikeshedding

[Robert Buchholz]

On Monday 30 March 2009, Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh schrieb:
> > So far, we've got this, by agreement of the Council:
> >
> > * There will be a default src_install in EAPI 3
> > * It will have a DOCS variable, or something along those lines.
> >
> > I'd like to suggest the following too:
> >
> > * If DOCS is explicitly specified, it is an error if anything in it
> >   doesn't exist.
> > * If DOCS isn't explicitly specified, it isn't an error if anything
> > in its default, if it has one, doesn't exist.
> >
> > We don't have an implementation yet. So I'll start off with this:
> >
> >     default_src_install() {
> >         emake -j1 DESTDIR="${D}" install
>
> Why do you want to force -j1 here?
>
> And i had this proposal some months ago, which noone argued against
> any more (the default list may of course be extended):
...

What Ciaran added was a way to disable installation of default DOCS. The 
implmenetation we discussed on the thread a while ago does not check 
whether DOCS is declared but empty.
I believe the way the DOCS variable is handled in the first example of 
the thread starter is good for a default_src_install although I don't 
know if we really need arrays. But why not? :-)


> So what about this funcion for the next EAPI and also implementation
> in base.eclass?

Why would you want to implement it in base.eclass when it's in EAPI=3? I 
can't think of a case where "inherit base" would make things easier 
than bumping to EAPI=3. In both cases, you might need to change logic 
within your ebuild and test it.


Robert