On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 05:22:43 +0100 hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Before people start asking I should explain why I started this: > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=458638 > > I think having such an eclass has several advantages over > autootools-multilib.eclass (which depends on autotools-utils.eclass) as > it is now: > > a) Less eclass dependencies. One could argue: the more eclasses my > ebuild uses the more prone to error and exposed to changes it is. > b) easier conversion in some cases: often times a simple rename > src_compile -> multilib_src_compile will do > c) it allows more custom definition of phase functions > d) the previous point will also allow to convert go-mono.eclass packages > without introducing yet another eclass for that Then don't put 'autotools' in the name. > e) autotools-utils.eclass does a bit more than just calling default > phase functions; the developer has little choice on this matter unless > he wants to rewrite his ebuild based on multilib-build.eclass which will > create a lot of code duplication in ebuilds, hence this proposition Yes, everyone sees 'a bit more' but nobody so far was able to point what it is exactly. Or people simply don't know what PMS does nowadays. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
