| 1 |
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dnia 2014-10-30, o godz. 15:21:17 |
| 3 |
> Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> After discussion and review by mgorny, and significantly more testing, |
| 6 |
>> here's an updated version of the previous patch. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> To reiterate, this patch changes python-single-r1 so that if there is |
| 9 |
>> only one supported Python implementation that can satisfy the ebuild, |
| 10 |
>> then PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET is ignored, and the ebuild is bound by the |
| 11 |
>> value(s) set in PYTHON_TARGETS instead. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> It is not ignored but not declared, which is good. Ignoring is bad :). |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> So I was pretty skeptic about this at first but after thinking it all |
| 16 |
> over a few times, I think it will work just fine. While it benefits |
| 17 |
> only the 'bad' kind of packages and adds some complexity, I believe |
| 18 |
> this is a worthwhile change. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I guess I'm still a little skeptical. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
What is the advantage to making such a change to python-single-r1 as |
| 23 |
opposed to just using python-r1 with a single implementation in |
| 24 |
PYTHON_COMPAT? |
Archives