Ciaran, On 02-04-2009 15:47:05 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 11:53:47 +0200 > Fabian Groffen <grob...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> While the first variable (EPREFIX) can be set using an eclass, the >> latter two need to be set by the package manager. In particular ED, >> because the value of D might not be known. EROOT and ED are >> convenience variables. Making them available already now, even >> though initialised as ROOT and D respectively, allows Prefix enabled >> ebuilds to be shared between gentoo-x86 and Prefix trees without >> modifications. > > Why not just do it properly? Come up with a full list of requirements, > propose a full solution, open it up for feedback and adapt it as > necessary. Then just move the whole thing into a future EAPI.
Recently we changed our approach from being a new EAPI into blending into any existing EAPI. We can do this, since Prefix is orthogonal to any existing EAPI to date. The mentioned variables simply make life easier, but are not strictly necessary. Unfortunately we can't set them from an eclass, so we need help from the package manager for them. > My worry is we'll end up with more legacy mess that package managers > will have to carry on supporting indefinitely, but that won't be used > by anything once prefix goes through the necessary changes to make it > mainstream. Limiting Gentoo Prefix ebuilds to a future EAPI will not be acceptable with regards to system packages and we will still have a crappy overlay for a long multi-year period. The fact is, Prefix ebuilds can be used regardless of EAPI in use. We used to do EAPI="prefix <#>" but that was way too much maintance overhead and just recently EAPI=prefix has been killed in favour of full compatability. You seem to suggest there are issues, do you have any specific concerns that we can address? -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level
