public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New eclass: autotools-multilib-minimal
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 16:12:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1361718738.20067.54.camel@belkin4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130224155715.428b0493@pomiocik.lan>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 992 bytes --]

El dom, 24-02-2013 a las 15:57 +0100, Michał Górny escribió:
[...]
> > d) the previous point will also allow to convert go-mono.eclass packages
> > without introducing yet another eclass for that
> 
> So you're introducing a hacky eclass just because you're too lazy to
> convert go-mono packages properly and too impatient to let others do
> the work properly for you?

Would be nice to know what autotools-utils.eclass is doing differently
that is showing this problem with go-mono.eclass packages :/

Only one question, what is the reason for us having base.eclass and
autotools-utils.eclass? I still try to use plain ebuilds without
inheritting autotools-utils.eclass as I usually don't need it, probably
others do the same and refuse to have to inherit it only for multilib
support :/ How do you plan to solve this problem?

I would also like to hear why that people refuses to use
autotools-utils.eclass... because I don't have a strong opinion on this
topic 


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-02-24 15:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-24  0:34 [gentoo-dev] New eclass: autotools-multilib-minimal hasufell
2013-02-24  4:22 ` hasufell
2013-02-24 10:06   ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 10:11     ` Diego Elio Pettenò
2013-02-24 14:17       ` hasufell
2013-02-24 14:33         ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-27 13:01         ` Samuli Suominen
2013-02-27 20:13           ` Michał Górny
2013-02-27 20:15           ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-24 14:57   ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 15:12     ` hasufell
2013-02-24 15:12     ` Pacho Ramos [this message]
2013-02-24 15:53       ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 16:21         ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-24 16:28         ` Alexis Ballier
2013-02-24 16:58         ` Samuli Suominen
2013-02-24 18:56           ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 19:40             ` hasufell
2013-02-24 18:05         ` [gentoo-dev] " Jonathan Callen
2013-02-24 18:18           ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 16:22 ` [gentoo-dev] " Alexis Ballier
2013-02-24 16:42   ` hasufell
2013-02-24 18:46     ` Alexis Ballier
2013-02-24 22:39 ` Samuli Suominen
2013-02-28  1:06   ` hasufell
2013-02-28  8:30     ` Michał Górny
2013-02-28 15:16       ` hasufell
2013-03-02  2:50       ` hasufell
2013-03-02 15:07         ` Michał Górny
2013-03-02 15:13           ` hasufell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1361718738.20067.54.camel@belkin4 \
    --to=pacho@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox