| 1 |
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 20:34:49 +0200 |
| 2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> That is, similar syntax as for SRC_URI? That would make parsing of the |
| 5 |
> FILES variable by ebuilds practically impossible. So presumably, one |
| 6 |
> would need another variable similar to A then, containing the files |
| 7 |
> from FILES but without the USE-disabled ones. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Yeah, that's the sort of misgivings I had when I thought of a similar |
| 10 |
idea myself. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I'd much rather a way to label groups of files by purpose, have portage |
| 13 |
validate them, and then apply certain labels manually against certain |
| 14 |
USE flags |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
For instance, |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
FILES["foo"] = "foo.patch bar.patch" |
| 19 |
FILES["quux"] = "quux.patch" |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
... |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
if use foo; then |
| 24 |
eapply $FILES["foo"] |
| 25 |
else |
| 26 |
eapply $FILES["quux"] |
| 27 |
fi |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
But that gets into things that are too hard to do in bash, like named |
| 30 |
arrays ( doable but unfamilar for most ) and arrays-in-named-arrays |
| 31 |
( ummm ) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Probably not a good idea to push the limitations of bash in this way. |
Archives