From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Snz5d-0005ql-HL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 08 Jul 2012 21:32:25 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A9473E058A; Sun, 8 Jul 2012 21:32:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E02CE055B for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2012 21:31:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.33] (159.Red-2-137-22.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [2.137.22.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pacho) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 28FFF1B4002 for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2012 21:31:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] base.eclass From: Pacho Ramos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <4FF9F499.4070704@necoro.eu> References: <4FF9C825.2060705@necoro.eu> <20120708221002.7accacb0@pomiocik.lan> <4FF9F499.4070704@necoro.eu> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-4mqd+tpVN6FCZKCT2THt" Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:31:13 +0200 Message-ID: <1341783073.8828.9.camel@belkin4> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 X-Archives-Salt: cdcb090c-6140-487e-a987-6720af4fcfc9 X-Archives-Hash: 0a8c1444b054d0510ea626422da2c261 --=-4mqd+tpVN6FCZKCT2THt Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable El dom, 08-07-2012 a las 22:59 +0200, Ren=C3=A9 Neumann escribi=C3=B3: > Am 08.07.2012 22:10, schrieb Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny: > > On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:49:25 +0200 > > Ren=C3=A9 Neumann wrote: > >=20 > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I'd like just to receive a short clarification about the 'status' of > >> base.eclass: Is this eclass expected to be available everywhere, i.e. > >> should each eclass make sure it imports and incorporates it. Or is it > >> just an eclass like the others and ebuilds should make sure they > >> inherit it if needed? > >=20 > > No. It is unmaintained, has serious design flaws and it simply should > > not be used anywhere. At least in EAPI !=3D [01]. > >=20 >=20 > Thanks for the clarification. As Mike already mentioned, one should > probably change the ebuild description to reflect just that fact. > (Because at the moment it just says the complete opposite.) >=20 > - Ren=C3=A9 >=20 And, if we are supposed to stop using it, it should print some kind of warning to remember developers to drop its usage --=-4mqd+tpVN6FCZKCT2THt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk/5/CEACgkQCaWpQKGI+9Se6wCeOQWduP+6zyQteVve4+KGeSeO qloAn0di9kc+IOJcucBa51/8zIyNGjtW =smWS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-4mqd+tpVN6FCZKCT2THt--