>>>>> On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Mike Frysinger wrote:

> obvious NAK until you sort out the open questions already raised
> about the backwards breaking change you're trying to land in PMS.

There are indeed some PMS patches pending about DISTDIR, FILESDIR,
WORKDIR, and S, but I fail to see where they would break backwards
compatibility.

If you look at the last council approved PMS version [1], you'll find
that DISTDIR and FILESDIR are only valid in src_* phases and are not
guaranteed to have a consistent value across phases. The problem with
this is that it would not allow assignment of the PATCHES array in
global scope, e.g.:

PATCHES=( "${DISTDIR}"/foo.patch "${WORKDIR}"/bar.patch )

After the PMS change, we will have the same properties for DISTDIR,
FILESDIR, WORKDIR, and S. Namely:

- All four variables will be valid in src_* phases and in global scope
- They will have a consistent value in the ebuild environment
- The actual directories must not be accessed in global scope

One could argue that this was overseen when EAPI 6 was approved.
In any case, ebuilds will be able to rely on more things than before.

Ulrich

[1] https://projects.gentoo.org/pms/6/pms.html#x1-118002