Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild laziness and binpkg overhead
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 04:24:05
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild laziness and binpkg overhead by Doug Goldstein
On 06/20/2012 06:46 AM, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: >> On 06/20/2012 06:19 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>> >>> On Tuesday 19 June 2012 22:46:26 Samuli Suominen wrote: >>>> >>>> On 06/15/2012 06:10 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Friday 15 June 2012 03:44:14 Samuli Suominen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 06/13/2012 06:02 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> i've noticed a growing trend where people put setup of variables into >>>>>>> pkg_setup that only matter to src_* funcs presumably so they don't >>>>>>> have >>>>>>> to call the respective src_* func from an inherited eclass. >>>>>>> unfortunately this adds pointless overhead to binpkgs. can we please >>>>>>> move away from this practice ? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Every Xfce ebuild in gentoo-x86 is using pkg_setup() for 3 variables, >>>>>> DOCS for src_install, PATCHES for src_prepare >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> these are static variables, so defining them in a func is pointless >>>> >>>> >>>> "sort of" not necessarily, 'has $useflag && PATCHES+=( )' has been used >>>> before, not sure if it's used in tree right now or not >>> >>> >>> as we've always said, USE conditional patches are to be highly discouraged >> >> >> I agree BUT there are cases where it's OK to use conditional patching: >> >> For example, libfoo-0.1.1 is broken and is fixed in git for master which >> will be in next release. The fix doesn't apply to 0.1.1 cleanly without >> heavy modifications. >> Then you would take the easiest possible route to get 0.1.1 working again, >> with the comfort of knowing it's properly fixed for the next version. >> >> -Samuli >> > > I assume you mean libfoo-0.1.1 is broken when USE=bar is enabled and > you get a patch for that conditional case when USE=bar is enabled.
Right. Of course.
> Either way, the better solution is to mask it and have people use libfoo-0.1.0 >
Doesn't really apply to this case: Think about masking stable Xfce 4.10 when the fix is in git that will be released as 4.12 in about year. ;-) - Samuli