Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Shall econf append its arguments to end of ./configure invocation?
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:53:39
Message-Id: 20862.56778.599974.921136@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Shall econf append its arguments to end of ./configure invocation? by Ciaran McCreesh
1 >>>>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
2
3 > On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:36:41 -0400
4 > Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote:
5 >> portage has always inserted implicit args before the args given by
6 >> the ebuild to econf. PMS omitting the ordering information is
7 >> simply an oversight to be clarified, not functionality that may be
8 >> relied upon.
9
10 +1
11
12 > As you can see in the bug, we're not discussing anything related to
13 > EAPI 0 behaviour, so this argument is irrelevant. We're discussing a
14 > change in a later EAPI, where the change had nothing to say about
15 > ordering.
16
17 In the discussions that led to inclusion of the feature in EAPI 4, it
18 was implicit that it would be possible to override the default. This
19 can only work if "$@" goes after all default options.
20
21 You had even claimed yourself that overriding the default with
22 econf --enable-dependency-tracking would always be possible:
23 http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_0189c554085ac8352b5a2e05647a1d97.xml
24
25 Ulrich

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Shall econf append its arguments to end of ./configure invocation? Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>