1 |
On 06/03/2012 03:01 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
2 |
>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2012, Samuli Suominen wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>>> On 05/29/2012 10:09 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
5 |
>> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_920c6d6daafe7702bfa3b8a2bc21e0c1.xml |
6 |
> |
7 |
>>> Can you indicate what the council has to vote on/decide for this one? |
8 |
> |
9 |
>> EAPI=5 |
10 |
> |
11 |
>> optional: "$@" placement in default for src_configure() |
12 |
> |
13 |
>> econf "$@" |
14 |
> |
15 |
>> optional: "$@" placement in default for src_compile() |
16 |
> |
17 |
>> emake "$@" |
18 |
> |
19 |
> I still don't see the point of it. econf or emake could just be called |
20 |
> directly. We won't gain anything by allowing arguments, but only |
21 |
> complicate things. |
22 |
> |
23 |
>> this one is what I'm really after for: |
24 |
> |
25 |
>> default for src_install() in EAPI=5 should accept "$@" in correct place |
26 |
>> to avoid usage of EXTRA_EMAKE within ebuilds/eclasses and to avoid |
27 |
>> duplicating the Portage code for DOCS. |
28 |
>> NOTE: When this was last voted on for EAPI=3, we didn't have this DOCS |
29 |
>> handling, and this wasn't important yet. |
30 |
> |
31 |
>> emake DESTDIR="${D}" "$@" install |
32 |
> |
33 |
> Again, this could be called directly, which has the advantage that it |
34 |
> makes it obvious that src_install isn't the default. |
35 |
|
36 |
The difference is working the tree when you have to alter ebuilds which |
37 |
have been written like: |
38 |
|
39 |
DOCS=( AUTHORS README.NOW "${FILESDIR}"/README.Gentoo ) |
40 |
|
41 |
src_install() { |
42 |
default |
43 |
|
44 |
echo "Some command here." |
45 |
} |
46 |
|
47 |
At this point you have to move content of DOCS which may or may not rely |
48 |
on the ""quoting with array"". Remove the call to default. And then |
49 |
duplicate the EAPI=4 default into the ebuild. |
50 |
|
51 |
And then replicate that every month dozen times and keep on doing it for |
52 |
some months. Get frustrated. |
53 |
|
54 |
If that's not enough, then you get all excited about EAPI=4 and finally |
55 |
think you have a replacement for base.eclass to port xfconf.eclass away |
56 |
from the thing when you only used it for default src_install() to avoid |
57 |
code duplication... |
58 |
|
59 |
Think you are all done, and then get complainment that support for extra |
60 |
arguments for xfconf_src_install was killed, and was required for things |
61 |
like: |
62 |
|
63 |
xfconf_src_install htmldirectory=/usr/share/doc/${PF}/html |
64 |
imagesdir=/usr/share/doc/${PF}/html/images |
65 |
|
66 |
Where sedding the build system runs maintainer mode at .in level, and |
67 |
runnning autotools (.am level) requires heavy documentation dependencies. |
68 |
You go back to base.eclass and get frustrated more. |
69 |
|
70 |
I hope that clears things up ;-) |
71 |
|
72 |
- Samuli |