From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-75611-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0E84138252
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Tue, 10 May 2016 21:23:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1F4C321C04D;
	Tue, 10 May 2016 21:22:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3183821C012
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 10 May 2016 21:22:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.9] (c-73-39-91-38.hsd1.md.comcast.net [73.39.91.38])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: mjo)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B81E934092D
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 10 May 2016 21:22:51 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] ebuild-writing/variables: better describe
 ROOT
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
References: <1462729330-24788-1-git-send-email-floppym@gentoo.org>
 <5731F960.50205@gentoo.org>
 <CAJ0EP41qOgxghRWWiDvSndO7TDxupEaVL1-H+pnE_c_3f9Kb=g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <573251B8.8090103@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 17:25:12 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.5.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJ0EP41qOgxghRWWiDvSndO7TDxupEaVL1-H+pnE_c_3f9Kb=g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 3edb6112-4755-4ae2-a6d2-7a6a0f43cd8f
X-Archives-Hash: ff24fa5e2a3704908a8cacf22121e044

On 05/10/2016 02:28 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> We have maybe 150 ebuilds in the tree using $ROOT in src_* functions.
>> Some are bugs, but many look OK to me. Do we really want to say "never"
>> do that?
> 
> According to PMS, it is only legal in pkg functions.
> 
> Can you point to an example where using ROOT in a src function is appropriate?
> 

Modulo the question "when should you use $ROOT over $EPREFIX"...

  * the chrome-binary-plugins ebuilds use it in src_install.

  * dmraid does

      einfo "Appending pkg.m4 from system to aclocal.m4"
      cat "${ROOT}"/usr/share/aclocal/pkg.m4 >>"${S}"/aclocal.m4 || \
        die "Could not append pkg.m4

Both of those look like EPREFIX candidates to me, but they're not
obviously wrong, either. Maybe it made sense in EAPI <= 3.

Anywhere that you need addpredict() it also seems reasonable. The
v4l-dvb-saa716x ebuilds use "${ROOT}/usr/src/linux/" where EPREFIX would
not be a good replacement.

Something needs to be fixed, though: you're right that the PMS limits
ROOT to pkg_*. Who knew? If we want to be serious about banning ROOT in
src_*, we should add a repoman error.

NB: the patch uses the HTTP spelling of "refering".