public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New eclass: autotools-multilib-minimal
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 05:22:43 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51299593.1010902@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51296027.705@gentoo.org>

Before people start asking I should explain why I started this:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=458638

I think having such an eclass has several advantages over
autootools-multilib.eclass (which depends on autotools-utils.eclass) as
it is now:

a) Less eclass dependencies. One could argue: the more eclasses my
ebuild uses the more prone to error and exposed to changes it is.
b) easier conversion in some cases: often times a simple rename
src_compile -> multilib_src_compile will do
c) it allows more custom definition of phase functions
d) the previous point will also allow to convert go-mono.eclass packages
without introducing yet another eclass for that
e) autotools-utils.eclass does a bit more than just calling default
phase functions; the developer has little choice on this matter unless
he wants to rewrite his ebuild based on multilib-build.eclass which will
create a lot of code duplication in ebuilds, hence this proposition

I don't have a problem with the present eclasses, but I find this a
logical enhancement.


  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-24  4:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-24  0:34 [gentoo-dev] New eclass: autotools-multilib-minimal hasufell
2013-02-24  4:22 ` hasufell [this message]
2013-02-24 10:06   ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 10:11     ` Diego Elio Pettenò
2013-02-24 14:17       ` hasufell
2013-02-24 14:33         ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-27 13:01         ` Samuli Suominen
2013-02-27 20:13           ` Michał Górny
2013-02-27 20:15           ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-24 14:57   ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 15:12     ` hasufell
2013-02-24 15:12     ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-24 15:53       ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 16:21         ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-24 16:28         ` Alexis Ballier
2013-02-24 16:58         ` Samuli Suominen
2013-02-24 18:56           ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 19:40             ` hasufell
2013-02-24 18:05         ` [gentoo-dev] " Jonathan Callen
2013-02-24 18:18           ` Michał Górny
2013-02-24 16:22 ` [gentoo-dev] " Alexis Ballier
2013-02-24 16:42   ` hasufell
2013-02-24 18:46     ` Alexis Ballier
2013-02-24 22:39 ` Samuli Suominen
2013-02-28  1:06   ` hasufell
2013-02-28  8:30     ` Michał Górny
2013-02-28 15:16       ` hasufell
2013-03-02  2:50       ` hasufell
2013-03-02 15:07         ` Michał Górny
2013-03-02 15:13           ` hasufell

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=51299593.1010902@gentoo.org \
    --to=hasufell@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