On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 23:20:15 +0000 (UTC) Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What proportion of people do you think know whether or not you need > > a die with econf or emake? > > This is a valid point as well. However, for a user simply concerned > with getting a functional ebuild so the package is tracked by the PM > as opposed to not (or manually tracking with package.provided), an > extra die or two, or even the lack thereof, and the docs and stuff, > don't matter as much as something easily understood and written with > little more than knowledge of bash and what's easily cribbed from a > few existing ebuilds used as samples.
People shouldn't be writing ebuilds to do that at all. They should be using a package manager provided tool that lets them keep track of ebuild-less packages in a way that integrates properly with everything else. > What's more worrying from the perspective of that person is that > while all these new vars are optional, if devs (with that > pre-knowledge) start using them as easier, pretty soon that person > above isn't going to have any easily accessible simple ebuilds to > crib from any more. Sure they will. There'll still be a significant number of ebuilds that fall somwwhere between "easy enough to handle with the defaults" and "horrid complex mess". -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
