On 14/06/2013 09:05, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:48:21 -0400
Chris Reffett <creff...@gentoo.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/13/2013 06:37 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
At the beginning of July, the KDE team will be removing EAPI 0/1
support from cmake-utils.eclass and inlining the functions from
base.eclass in order to remove that inherit [1].
So, instead of fixing what you consider wrong in base.eclass, you
inline it so that if someone improves base.eclass he has to do it
for cmake-utils too?
We did not actually inline most of the complicated logic from
base.eclass, as to the best of my knowledge epatch itself will handle
all of the corner cases that base_src_prepare covers. The new patching
code essentially consists of [[ ${PATCHES[@]} ]] && epatch
"${PATCHES[@]}"; epatch_user.
that kind of stuff sounds more like it should be factorized rather than
copied all around; be it base.eclass, an EAPI, or another eclass I
don't really care.
The code literally is '[[ ${PATCHES[@]} ]] && epatch "${PATCHES[@]}"'.
Given that the actual epatch logic is in one place, I am not sure how
much of an issue this really is. I think there's a proposal to put
epatch into PMS too.
Best regards,
Michael
