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 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1So9KH-0008V7-V0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 08:28:14 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 49EA9E05D5; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 08:27:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FCCDE052E for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 08:27:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.186.72.235] (212-226-56-192-nat.elisa-mobile.fi [212.226.56.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ssuominen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7AC041B4042 for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 08:27:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4FFA9481.6040702@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:21:21 +0300 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120706 Thunderbird/13.0 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] base.eclass References: <4FF9C825.2060705@necoro.eu> <20120708221002.7accacb0@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <20120708221002.7accacb0@pomiocik.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 396068db-db4d-49d9-baea-32f406369f8c X-Archives-Hash: bcc03cc80bfecd47d8f799b37da514a1 On 07/08/2012 11:10 PM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:49:25 +0200 > Ren=C3=A9 Neumann wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I'd like just to receive a short clarification about the 'status' of >> base.eclass: Is this eclass expected to be available everywhere, i.e. >> should each eclass make sure it imports and incorporates it. Or is it >> just an eclass like the others and ebuilds should make sure they >> inherit it if needed? > > No. It is unmaintained, has serious design flaws and it simply should > not be used anywhere. At least in EAPI !=3D [01]. > yet base.eclass supports arguments for base_src_install passed to 'make=20 install' and council voted against moving this to the PM so what ciaranm said is very true, people just refuse to let it become=20 useless