| 1 |
On 02/07/2015 08:43 AM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: |
| 2 |
> But PAM does not define econf, right? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Yeah, it seems like a useful econf extension. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> I am suggesting that econf should hide the sysroot stuff so one does not have to modify every ebuild |
| 7 |
> in the tree. Where does econf belong? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Any changes to econf extensions need to be part of a new EAPI, and |
| 10 |
specified in PMS. You can file a bug and make it block the future-eapi |
| 11 |
tracker [1]. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174380 |
| 14 |
-- |
| 15 |
Thanks, |
| 16 |
Zac |
Archives