From: "Petteri Räty" <betelgeuse@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Prefix: on EPREFIX, ED and EROOT inside ebuilds
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:37:30 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AE3577A.1090000@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091019194459.GY464@gentoo.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1766 bytes --]
Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 18-10-2009 14:31:15 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> On 18-10-2009 13:57:10 +0200, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> You know i am totaly supporting prefix but i have one point.
>>> Why on earth portage simply does not detect the prefix enviroment is being run
>>> and then INTERNALY switch D->ED and other variables. It would be much easier
>>> that way to migrate all stuff in portage instead of doing this || shebang.
>>> Mostly when it is done by eclasses its quite cool, but when you get into
>>> changing lots of ebuilds its quite hard for maintaining.
>>>
>>> Even the multilib overlay guys rather modify the portage than changing a load
>>> of ebuilds.
>> Of course we would like to do that, but that was rejected for EAPI=3, so
>> it will at least take until EAPI=4 is implemented, which is not the
>> forseeable future, given that EAPI=3 isn't a fact yet either.
>
> I was just informed that it is also a possibility to do an EAPI bump
> just for these variables, which would mean we can avoid replicating
> setting ED and EROOT in ebuilds.
>
It's possible.
> The suggestion was to just introduce EAPI=3 with these variables, and
> making everything which is scheduled for current EAPI=3 just EAPI=4. I
> was told we could quite quickly have a Portage in the tree that would
> set ED and EROOT for EAPI=3 that way.
>
Maybe 2+prefix is a more describing name? This would avoid changing what
EAPI 3 means.
> Are there any objections to this? If not, I'd like to put this on the
> agenda for the next council meeting.
>
As the council decided to add new stuff in the last meeting if zac is
starting to implement new EAPIs this could go into EAPI 3 too.
Regards,
Petteri
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-24 19:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-18 9:11 [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Prefix: on EPREFIX, ED and EROOT inside ebuilds Fabian Groffen
2009-10-18 11:57 ` Tomáš Chvátal
2009-10-18 12:31 ` Fabian Groffen
2009-10-19 19:44 ` Fabian Groffen
2009-10-24 19:37 ` Petteri Räty [this message]
2009-10-24 20:00 ` Fabian Groffen
2009-11-13 11:43 ` Ulrich Mueller
2009-11-20 8:45 ` Fabian Groffen
2009-11-20 0:26 ` Denis Dupeyron
2009-11-20 1:42 ` Jeremy Olexa
2009-11-20 9:03 ` Fabian Groffen
2009-11-25 23:43 ` Denis Dupeyron
2009-11-26 8:53 ` Fabian Groffen
2009-11-26 10:01 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2009-11-26 10:10 ` Fabian Groffen
2009-11-26 10:37 ` Duncan
2009-11-26 10:51 ` Fabian Groffen
2009-11-26 12:36 ` Duncan
2009-11-26 15:26 ` Fabian Groffen
2009-11-26 13:43 ` [gentoo-dev] " Fabian Groffen
2009-11-26 0:01 ` Denis Dupeyron
2009-11-26 9:02 ` Fabian Groffen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4AE3577A.1090000@gentoo.org \
--to=betelgeuse@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox