On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 23:40:29 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > A lot of (inheriting eclasses and) packages depend on features > provided by base.eclass (e.g., PATCHES), which are pretty neat and > which I would sorely miss. So I would certainly object to deprecating > base.eclass, unless its relevant functionality is only moving to a > better place.
Then you should ask for EAPI support for PATCHES, or write the code manually, or put the code in a small eclass that just does that. But note that the Council has voted against having either arguments or global scope variables to enhance default phase functions. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
