On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 06:58:51 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> 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.

Because? I believe we should take 'Gentoo rules', including required
explicit build+run at the start.

> > Not that appending dependencies in eclasses is really that good
> > idea.
> 
> Dependencies aren't appended over eclasses, they're merged.

Thanks for correcting my wording, like the naming was really relevant
to the topic.

> (And I have a sneaking recollection of PMS not documenting this
> properly...)

Yes, I think PMS is pretty silent about this. I think it doesn't even
say that in phase functions the contents are implementation-defined.

> > 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.

Do you really believe in HDEPEND in EAPI 5? I've already postponed this
in my mind. Also, not every single ebuild will actually need it.

> > 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.

Changing package manager API like that between EAPI is just bad. You
know that, don't you?

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to