On Sunday 07 March 2010 13:31:56 Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 07:42 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Saturday 06 March 2010 02:11:15 Petteri Räty wrote:
> >> On 03/05/2010 08:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>> sometimes i have optional patches (ignoring the "patches should always
> >>> be applied") where autotools should be run.  always inheriting
> >>> autotools is currently annoying because it always adds the related
> >>> dependencies.  USE based inherits are obviously out.
> >>> 
> >>> so unless there's some burgeoning standard i'm not aware of, below is
> >>> what i have in mind.  packages set AUTOTOOLS_AUTO_DEPEND to "no" before
> >>> inheriting autotools.eclass and that allows them to put
> >>> ${AUTOTOOLS_DEPEND} behind a USE flag in their own DEPEND string.
> >> 
> >> What we use in Java is JAVA_PKG_OPT_USE to declare what use flag the
> >> DEPENDs should be under. This approach doesn't allow the ebuild
> >> maintainer to forget adding the depends.
> > 
> > i'm more inclined towards Jonathan's opinion, so ive kept the proposed
> > behavior (plus a fix from Torsten).
> 
> And what about my latest response to him?

considering your proposal saves ${FOO} in DEPEND, it hasnt changed my opinion
-mike