>>>>> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015, Michał Górny wrote:

> Dnia 2015-10-17, o godz. 14:19:15
> "Jason A. Donenfeld" <zx2c4@gentoo.org> napisał(a):

>> What's the story of eapply? Why does this need to go into the PMS,
>> and not continue to be supplied by epatch from the eclass? What
>> is gained from moving it to PMS, and why is it more semantically
>> correct to have it there? Just curious about this.

> There are two reasons:

> 1. patching is quite common. The idea behind part of my additions
> for EAPI 6 was to add really common and reusable things, so they
> wouldn't have to be carried over in eclasses forever. Having eapply
> in EAPI 6 means a fair number of ebuilds will not have to inherit
> huge eutils.

Also epatch will still be available in eutils.eclass for complicated
cases. For example, eapply doesn't do autodetection of the path prefix
depth, but is hardwired to -p1.

Ulrich