Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] EAPI 6 draft for review

["Michał Górny" <mgorny@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1520 bytes --]

Dnia 2015-10-17, o godz. 08:38:51
Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> napisał(a):

> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 8:25 AM, hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On 10/17/2015 02:19 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> >>
> >> The other question is more critical -- could you merge eapply and
> >> eapply_user? Or add some hook to PMS so that eapply_user isn't needed?
> >> IOW, it'd be nice if every package was, by default, patchable by the user.
> >>
> >
> > IMO, eapply_user should not be in the eclass and not in PMS. patches are
> > something that can easily be done via PM hooks, if the PM has proper
> > hooks support.
> >
> 
> The reason this was done was to give maintainers more control over
> WHEN patches are applied, while still ensuring they are applyied.
> 
> The other feature that is supposed to be in EAPI6 (I didn't read the
> draft yet) is that the PM should refuse to install the package if
> eapply is never called (ie src_prepare is overridden and the ebuild
> didn't call eapply).  It is required that all ebuilds call it once
> unconditionally.  That way users don't get inconsistent behavior from
> package to package and be dependent on maintainers to fix it.
> 
> We'd have to dig through the archives, but I'm sure there was
> extensive discussion about whether this belonged in the PM or PMS.

I don't think this was really accepted. I think the best we can do is
make repoman complain about it.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]