| 1 |
On 05/30/2012 05:42 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wednesday 30 May 2012 20:18:11 Zac Medico wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 05/25/2012 09:20 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On Thursday 24 May 2012 16:04:30 Zac Medico wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> On 05/24/2012 12:20 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 6 |
>>>>> Rather than copying & pasting the same behavior for the |
| 7 |
>>>>> different eclass checks, add a common class for them to extend. |
| 8 |
>>>>> This makes adding more eclass checks trivial, and keeps down |
| 9 |
>>>>> bitrot. |
| 10 |
>>>>> |
| 11 |
>>>>> This does abuse the checking interface slightly -- the eclass |
| 12 |
>>>>> will change its category between unused and missing based on |
| 13 |
>>>>> the checks. |
| 14 |
>>>> |
| 15 |
>>>> Looks good to me. |
| 16 |
>>> |
| 17 |
>>> i'll push this now while we hammer out the "complete" solution |
| 18 |
>>> since these get pretty good coverage right now |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> Do you want to support EGIT_BOOTSTRAP settings prior to inherit? |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> For example, dev-libs/polylib/polylib-9999.ebuild triggers |
| 23 |
>> inherit.missing because InheritEclass currently expects the inherit to |
| 24 |
>> occur before the EGIT_BOOTSTRAP="eautoreconf" setting. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> i don't think we need to support that level of detection. it's a fairly |
| 27 |
> extreme edge case, and we can just let the git eclass say "allow implicit |
| 28 |
> autotools eclass inclusion" all the time. |
| 29 |
> -mike |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Okay, this seems to do the trick: |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=6d3873a690ccdf47f1d5c3f83fc8dbef92f5a9f1 |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Thanks, |
| 36 |
Zac |
Archives