From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SNnjD-0003GX-4S for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:09:03 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DFCB2E0802; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:08:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 215B3E05B9 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:08:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.26.5] (ip98-164-193-252.oc.oc.cox.net [98.164.193.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9CCCA1B4006 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:08:07 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F9AC466.5040208@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:08:06 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120404 Thunderbird/11.0.1 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Making user patches globally available References: <20120415021641.1858ffde@gentoo.org> <4F8A885C.3050508@gentoo.org> <20120418185913.3d2fa68f@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> <201204181340.00474.vapier@gentoo.org> <20120418184138.50153e57@googlemail.com> <4F8F05E9.5070103@gentoo.org> <4F8F0929.2010109@googlemail.com> <4F8F18EC.3000707@gentoo.org> <4F8F3513.2060202@googlemail.com> <20120425224433.2fa0f2de@gentoo.org> <4F98EA90.4000403@gentoo.org> <4F9967DE.8000601@gentoo.org> <4F99F941.90705@gentoo.org> <20120427152709.14a6c0bf@googlemail.com> <4F9ABE2F.8050006@gentoo.org> <20120427164549.052d85be@googlemail.com> <4F9AC185.1000708@gentoo.org> <20120427170029.44eb6eb3@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120427170029.44eb6eb3@googlemail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0399ddfa-03b6-4741-b4a3-cf77fff6e6e9 X-Archives-Hash: 3d84bb96a8588719090a797d380433c0 On 04/27/2012 09:00 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:55:49 -0700 > Zac Medico wrote: >> I suppose that we could do it both ways. The repoman check would be >> for people who want a practical approach that doesn't require all >> ebuilds to be converted to EAPI 5, and your strict die approach would >> be for people who want strictness and can afford to wait for the >> relevant ebuilds to be converted to EAPI 5. > > But there's no way the repoman check is going to give anything like > reliable answers if you're involving eclasses... Okay, so people who need "reliable answers" can go with your strict approach. Meanwhile, it's relatively easy to to a manual audit of the src_prepare function of each eclass. -- Thanks, Zac