| 1 |
On 29 April 2013 06:55, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> As you haven't expected at all, the PMS is a specific spec which |
| 5 |
> doesn't document much of common sense. Therefore, the way econf is |
| 6 |
> currently declared leaves the freedom of adding its arguments anywhere |
| 7 |
> in the ./configure invocation [1]. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> By that, I mean that: |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> econf --libdir=/lib |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> could actually result in: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> ./configure --libdir=/lib ... --libdir=<here-goes-default-libdir> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> The only option guaranteed to be handled properly is --prefix which is |
| 18 |
> directly processed by econf. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Why I'm bringing this up? Because of bug #406117. Long story short, |
| 21 |
> it's mostly about Ciaran having the imagination to let paludis pass |
| 22 |
> ./configure arguments in semi-random order. As a result, default |
| 23 |
> --disable-dependency-tracking goes after explicit |
| 24 |
> --enable-dependency-tracking from the ebuild. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Now, what are your thoughts? Shall we fix PMS to explicitly state |
| 27 |
> the argument order or implement ugly hacks in ebuilds? |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> [1]:http://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/5/pms.html#x1-13500011.3.3.7 |
| 30 |
> [2]:https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=406117 |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> -- |
| 33 |
> Best regards, |
| 34 |
> Michał Górny |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Fair enough. The common sense is for econf to pass the "fixed" |
| 37 |
arguments right after ./configure and then any user specific options |
| 38 |
would go at the end. But since PMS is not clear about it, you can't |
| 39 |
blame people for not doing it properly. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
so +1 to fix PMS. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Regards, |
| 45 |
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer |
| 46 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang |
Archives