From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KxRNk-0008TY-KK for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:16:04 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2F204E047B; Tue, 4 Nov 2008 19:16:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09A68E047B for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2008 19:16:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A2B643DF for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2008 19:16:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.28 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.28 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.319, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6aDhFGXV-nkg for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2008 19:15:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D8C6642B2 for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2008 19:15:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KxRNV-0006Ou-HX for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:15:49 +0000 Received: from s010600a0d12f7cee.mj.shawcable.net ([70.64.204.64]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:15:49 +0000 Received: from dirtyepic by s010600a0d12f7cee.mj.shawcable.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:15:49 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Ryan Hill Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Reinstating eclasses Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 13:15:25 -0600 Message-ID: <20081104131525.6821d0ed@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca> References: <20081104174307.5bd3d834@gentoo.org> <491097EB.4070608@gentoo.org> 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/ayghQ2dsBBb.L4kk0FOl+qN"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s010600a0d12f7cee.mj.shawcable.net X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.6.1 (GTK+ 2.14.4; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 9e2bd72d-339d-44c5-84b5-8ddc44cc5863 X-Archives-Hash: 7026a6874a341e33673e9d65c760c223 --Sig_/ayghQ2dsBBb.L4kk0FOl+qN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 13:43:55 -0500 Joe Peterson wrote: > Christoph Mende wrote: > > Now the most logical name for an eclass like that > > would be xfce4.eclass, except that eclass already exists. >=20 > Since the new eclass is not version specific, how about simply > "xfce.eclass"? why bother introducing yet another xfce*.eclass when you can re-use an existing one? --=20 gcc-porting, by design, by neglect treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 --Sig_/ayghQ2dsBBb.L4kk0FOl+qN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkkQn00ACgkQiqiDRvmkBmIqnwCggEGCVp8osbrdFMNEyc37EPUv XCoAoOWXn52JNZ7Xe7QxXUfeYAGH8AL7 =K99R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/ayghQ2dsBBb.L4kk0FOl+qN--