On Wed, 5 Sep 2012 18:15:43 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > If we really want to go this route, then please at least require > explicit label at start of DEPENDENCIES. And the same when appending > to DEPENDENCIES -- just so 'unlikely' mistakes will leave us with > hours of debugging.
We should take the exheres-0 rules for labels and eclasses, which limit labels' scopes to blocks, and which introduce an extra ( ) block around the outside when doing eclass variable merging. > Not that appending dependencies in eclasses is really that good idea. Dependencies aren't appended over eclasses, they're merged. (And I have a sneaking recollection of PMS not documenting this properly...) > Remember that this requirement will actually cause migration to EAPI 5 > to be even harder than to any previous EAPIs. Migrating a single > ebuild will require rewriting the dependencies, and migrating an > eclass will require adding a lot of dirty code. Migrating to EAPI 5 requires rewriting dependencies anyway if we're adding in HDEPEND. Also, earlier EAPIs have introduced new phase functions, which is a far ickier change for ebuilds than this. > Especially if it is python.eclass. You know what the solution there is... > And we will have to convert them back to old-style dependencies > anyway. For the sake of compatibility with external tools. No, external tools are required to be EAPI aware. If they're not, then the external tools need fixing. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
