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 1Snvpe-0008ML-Sx for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 08 Jul 2012 18:03:43 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6454AE0486; Sun, 8 Jul 2012 18:03:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A26AE031D for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2012 18:02:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com (mail-wg0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: floppym) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BFA301B402F for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2012 18:02:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wgbds1 with SMTP id ds1so1920003wgb.4 for ; Sun, 08 Jul 2012 11:02:31 -0700 (PDT) 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 Received: by 10.180.92.7 with SMTP id ci7mr26866323wib.1.1341770551352; Sun, 08 Jul 2012 11:02:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.3.142 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Jul 2012 11:02:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120708185455.5c3fcbc1@googlemail.com> References: <4FF9C825.2060705@necoro.eu> <20120708185455.5c3fcbc1@googlemail.com> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 14:02:31 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] base.eclass From: Mike Gilbert To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 345ee6d3-e6b4-4253-9da9-73af7a142c36 X-Archives-Hash: b52a46dd19ce37a9cfeae5d1c0d12ec9 On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 19:49:25 +0200 > Ren=C3=A9 Neumann wrote: >> 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? > > base.eclass is a historical mistake, from before the design of eclasses > was fully figured out and moved into the package manager. Unfortunately, > rather than letting it die, people keep putting things in it and using > it... I think it would be a good idea to remove the second sentence of the description, which is clearly false. # @DESCRIPTION: # The base eclass defines some default functions and variables. Nearly # everything else inherits from here.