On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:27:03 +0100 Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > >> b) Does it really matter? > > > > In the grand scheme of things, no. In the grand scheme of things, > > you only *need* a single src_ function. From a maintainer > > convenience perspective, however, src_prepare is marginally more > > useful than having a split src_configure. > > > How so? > > From a user point of view, and from a maintenance point of view, > src_configure is very useful. As a maintainer I would find it very useful to be able to do `ebuild foo-1.ebuild <phase>` to get the build dir into following states: a) pristine source (unpack) b) patched, seded, eautoreconf'd, or everything-else-we're-doing-in-src_unpack-right-now'd (prepare) c) ./configured (configure) d) compiled (compile) the state between a) and b) is very useful as anyone who has gone back and forth commenting and uncommenting epatch/eautoreconf lines in src_unpack (ie. everyone) can attest. between c) and d) would be less useful for me but still quite welcome. -- gcc-porting, by design, by neglect treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
