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 1So7eE-0006vW-1r for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 06:40:42 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E3DF1E04EB; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 06:40:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6137E0441 for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 06:39:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (178-37-171-8.adsl.inetia.pl [178.37.171.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 64CAF1B4006; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 06:39:40 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 08:39:38 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: aballier@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] base.eclass Message-ID: <20120709083938.5097f89c@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <20120708173508.058a4a7a@gentoo.org> References: <4FF9C825.2060705@necoro.eu> <20120708221002.7accacb0@pomiocik.lan> <20120708173508.058a4a7a@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_//T/eJpe1sxNYzbjhNXLGh9G"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 6f83d574-d6e9-4dc5-aaf6-a136b9c0ba1b X-Archives-Hash: 3299f17e2123e0fb4f862e50c72d8085 --Sig_//T/eJpe1sxNYzbjhNXLGh9G Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 17:35:08 -0400 Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 22:10:02 +0200 > Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >=20 > > On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:49:25 +0200 > > Ren=C3=A9 Neumann wrote: > >=20 > > > Hi all, > > >=20 > > > 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 > what is the PATCHES=3D() replacement in new eapis? (mainly why i use > base.eclass more and more these days) That's what I used: [[ ${PATCHES} ]] && epatch "${PATCHES[@]}" --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_//T/eJpe1sxNYzbjhNXLGh9G Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAk/6fK4ACgkQfXuS5UK5QB0b6AQAlkllNWRujc7AuwoJtqeKzvB+ 97akTXQb3EbQwP5YvMaK4Mj6GchWXUDGU5sW9gs5qErTDoU8mQlY/bkDsG/OkX53 zvQqzfGp1jA/hN/60tRirv8PqByGlR+2C4pwvQkfQwyzQK04IvGlnJRcAmiMMFxg NyCgk3DYE0nT1ZRa4Jo= =x9if -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_//T/eJpe1sxNYzbjhNXLGh9G--