On Tuesday 19 June 2012 23:27:06 Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 06/20/2012 06:19 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Tuesday 19 June 2012 22:46:26 Samuli Suominen wrote: > >> On 06/15/2012 06:10 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>> On Friday 15 June 2012 03:44:14 Samuli Suominen wrote: > >>>> On 06/13/2012 06:02 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>>>> i've noticed a growing trend where people put setup of variables into > >>>>> pkg_setup that only matter to src_* funcs presumably so they don't > >>>>> have to call the respective src_* func from an inherited eclass. > >>>>> unfortunately this adds pointless overhead to binpkgs. can we please > >>>>> move away from this practice ? > >>>> > >>>> Every Xfce ebuild in gentoo-x86 is using pkg_setup() for 3 variables, > >>>> DOCS for src_install, PATCHES for src_prepare > >>> > >>> these are static variables, so defining them in a func is pointless > >> > >> "sort of" not necessarily, 'has $useflag && PATCHES+=( )' has been used > >> before, not sure if it's used in tree right now or not > > > > as we've always said, USE conditional patches are to be highly > > discouraged > > I agree BUT there are cases where it's OK to use conditional patching: > > For example, libfoo-0.1.1 is broken and is fixed in git for master which > will be in next release. The fix doesn't apply to 0.1.1 cleanly without > heavy modifications. > Then you would take the easiest possible route to get 0.1.1 working > again, with the comfort of knowing it's properly fixed for the next > version.
hypothetical situations are great and all, but how many of those apply to the ebuilds you're worried about ? i'd wager most do not. can we please fix the majority here ? i'd be significantly less grumpy if we treated this as the exception instead of the rule. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
