-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 07/09/2012 08:45 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 23:40:29 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel"
> <dilfri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> Am Sonntag 08 Juli 2012, 22:10:02 schrieb Michał Górny:
>>> On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:49:25 +0200
>>> 
>>> René Neumann <li...@necoro.eu> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> I'd like just to receive a short clarification about the
>>>> 'status' of base.eclass: Is this eclass expected to be
>>>> available everywhere, i.e. should each eclass make sure it
>>>> imports and incorporates it. Or is it just an eclass like the
>>>> others and ebuilds should make sure they inherit it if
>>>> needed?
>>> 
>>> No. It is unmaintained, has serious design flaws and it simply 
>>> should not be used anywhere. At least in EAPI != [01].
>> 
>> Please clarify this.
>> 
>> 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.
> 
> base.eclass is randomly exporting non-requested, non-wanted phase 
> functions colliding with other inherited eclasses. It's just the
> lexical order of inherits what stops mayhem from happening.
> 
> In other words, base.eclass is only suitable if you are expecting
> to export *all* phase functions which simply doesn't happen in
> eclasses.
> 
> For example, if distutils used base eclass, every VCS eclass
> inherited before it would be ignored (due to src_unpack() redefined
> to default one for no good reason).
> 

There are tons of eclasses "randomly" exporting phase functions. That
is not the problem. The problem is that other eclasses inherit
base.eclass. Only that leads to this mess.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJP+tmXAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWz2JMH/AwYoHvD9vIBhSSDCQ6np/L5
NzDHuKcqUKKQ5bs9+gHWSf81lFaazu9mw187d1o016nD6TQ1rPjbulQhU9ZLuCt1
qDGBAH1j1vPOktstxzkAXWRzkmbkGir9hz5Mw8WO+AXvcHa5sP4stiaNQyL6ZKhe
hhfLkZC+ToZP8CcW7yeS8nC910bvDV9hVfNxsBOMR/EKY/aSnHcsfOf4c3pCX9xd
YrrEvoT9zdx9827sk8+PO4m4kAZsvjem7IiTTa+LRH1wPf5DBpjL19c0pSyHF3Kc
kBDL4BFrT4lqoNhO0vDXL45AVRsKz2/G0Tu7XLg2ewwCZByPpPlGR277wLjRo44=
=DaE5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to