On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 06:46:33 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:50:30 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > > > Are you sure this is defined behaviour? IUSE is a fancy merged > > > variable for eclasses, and I don't think we guarantee that the value > > > visible to the ebuild at any particular point is the generated value > > > used by the package mangler. > > > > True. I guess there's no way to tell whether a particular IUSE is > > defined in the ebuild then? Hrm, I guess we'll need to break API > > compat (and a number of ebuilds then) to get rid of this. > > You don't do it by checking IUSE. You do it by having the ebuild define > a variable like WANT_MONKEY_SUPPORT.
it's a crap shoot. as long as Michał's proposed func doesnt attempt to make guarantees that don't exist now, i think it's fine. we have ebuilds/eclasses that are already using it, so unifying it purely for the [+-] cleanup makes sense to me. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
