Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: [Future EAPI] Exporting phase funcs from direct inherits only

[Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org>]

On 08/14/2012 02:51 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 14:09:17 -0700
> Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 08/14/2012 01:54 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 21:45:56 +0100
>>> Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:44:49 +0200
>>>> Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>>> As some of you may have noticed, lately introduced 'double include
>>>>> preventions' have caused changes in effective phase functions in a
>>>>> few ebuilds. Also, often it is undesirable that change in inherits
>>>>> of an eclass may cause an undesired change of exported functions.
>>>>
>>>> The problem here is that eclasses aren't clearly split between
>>>> "utility" and "does stuff", so people are inheriting "does stuff"
>>>> eclasses to get utilities. The fix is to stop having stupidly huge
>>>> complicated eclasses; changing inherit behaviour is just
>>>> wallpapering over the gaping hole.
>>
>> Ciaran's assessment sounds pretty accurate to me.
>>
>>> Soo, how do you propose to handle bug 422533 without changing
>>> inherit behavior?
>>
>> Close it as WONTFIX. The ifndef thing that we're doing now seems like
>> a reasonable approach.
> 
> But you're aware that this 'reasonable approach' just made the whole
> problem by changing exported functions, right?

That just means that somebody made a mistake. They should have put the
EXPORT_FUNCTIONS call *outside* of the ifndef block. Just educate people
about the correct place to put the EXPORT_FUNCTIONS call, and that
problem is solved.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac