On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 09:15:50 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> That said, I don't find the current solution really optimal. A lot of > ebuilds (mine, for example) are not using elibtoolize, and I expect > that they may randomly fail for some people in corner cases. But I > don't feel like adding another eclass to all ebuilds in the tree is > a good idea. > > Portage already does some configure updates in econf. How about we > move the whole thing straight into Portage, implicitly activated by > econf? That would certainly increase coverage, remove some QA > violations from ECLASSDIR and possibly solve the problem long-term. > > What do you think? I support this. I don't know if it's as big a problem as it was when I last looked at it but cross-compiling often failed without the sysroot patch. Much like you, before becoming a dev, I did not want to file a whole string of bug reports requesting that elibtoolize be added to loads of ebuilds. -- James Le Cuirot (chewi) Gentoo Linux Developer
