[gentoo-dev] eutils.eclass / EPATCH_EXCLUDE defined wrong?

[gentoo-dev] eutils.eclass / EPATCH_EXCLUDE defined wrong?

[Kent Fredric]

I was goofing around trying to get current dev-vcs/git-9999 building
by skipping the CVS patch ( which is applied with epatch ) and I had a
bizzare amount of time working out how to get it working.

Looking at the source of eutils.eclass '  # Let people filter things
dynamically ' suggests to me that this field is for use by a end user
via package.env and friends.

However, every time I ran emerge, the 'environment' file simply
suggests that EPATCH_EXCLUDE was ="" .

Looking elsewhere in eutils.eclass, I spied a forced initialization of
EPATCH_EXCLUDE, which implicitly means you can't actually use this to
exclude patches outside .ebuild

Commenting this line out, yielded the result I had been expecting, the
CVS patch being skipped .

I only thought I could  do this because I used something like this
once upon a time with net-im/psi-9999 and thought it was just "normal"
to be able to disable patches if I really wanted to. ( But I see now
they acheive this by copying MY_EPATCH_EXCLUDE to EPATCH_EXCLUDE in
the .ebuild ).

So, is this variable guarded against user tampering intentionally? It
sure beats hacking the ebuild.

( Side note, what would also be nice is some sort of warning if things
you set in package.env are getting totally ignored. But thats a hard
problem )

-- 
Kent

perl -e  "print substr( \"edrgmaM  SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3,
3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );"

http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz

Re: [gentoo-dev] eutils.eclass / EPATCH_EXCLUDE defined wrong?

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 506 bytes --]

On Monday 06 August 2012 15:45:46 Kent Fredric wrote:
> Looking at the source of eutils.eclass '  # Let people filter things
> dynamically ' suggests to me that this field is for use by a end user
> via package.env and friends.

no, it is meant for packagers to have a single patch tarball, setup 
EPATCH_EXCLUDE based on USE flags, and then run epatch on that one dir.  
otherwise, you'd have to `rm` files.

there is no support for end users discarding selective patches via package.env
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]