Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: perl-module.eclass: respect CFLAGS, LDFLAGS - please review

["Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1484 bytes --]

Am Sonntag, 22. Juni 2014, 15:31:43 schrieb Rich Freeman:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Kent Fredric <kentfredric@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 23 June 2014 01:02, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> >> The usual conditional for that is USE=custom-cflags or a similar variant
[...]
> > The problem with a USE flag here as such is the change this eclass makes
> > affects >900 packages in dev-perl/ , and its not easy to casually
> > determine which of those packages have any C bits where CFLAGS are even
> > meaningful.
> > 
> > Which would mean having >900 packages with a new IUSE value that did
> > nothing for a majority of them.

The numbers are even worse; the use flag would be added to ~1400 packages, and 
it would actually matter for only ~300.

> Would it make more sense to move filtering (and thus the flag) to
> packages that actually use it, instead of doing it in the eclass?  By
> the same logic you have >900 packages filtering CFLAGS when many of
> them don't even use CFLAGS.

Offhand I don't know any way how the eclass could "know" whether a perl 
package requires C building or not. Any heuristics would be a hack at best. It 
might even be preferable to manually add some variable to 300 packages in the 
ebuild (which then makes the eclass add a use-flag custom-cflags).
i.e.

PERL_CFLAGS_HANDLING=yes
inherit perl-module

-- 

Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 966 bytes --]