On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Reinis Danne wrote: > > I have cleaned up a bit alternatives-2.eclass to make it easier to review. > Also if someone knows any shortcommings of this eclass as it is, then point > it out, I'll try to address them. > > I hope this can be soon moved to the main tree thus closing the divide > between > science overlay and portage tree. > Your changes are mostly minor and only apply to the eclass, so I have no comments. You should commit them to the overlay, code reviews on the github review panel are more practical than on the mailing list. One important thing the creation of eselect modules could be done directly from eselect rather than the eclass, keeping the eclass much more simple, and allowing users to create their own providers easily. I may work on it. I had some local changes of eselect and I added the repo [1] to the github gentoo-science, that you can test by unmasking eselect-9999. Known issues of the alternatives framework: * when having more than 1 provider, updating a package that provided the eselected provider, will not re-eselect the same provider unless it was the first on the list * possible residual orphan files * given the number of bugs, we should keep the linking to the reference names libraries, so we could eselect providers without re-compiling all reverse dependencies. We could do this in the open sourced providers by changing the soname of the libraries we compile, and in the binary ones (mkl,amcl...) with a link script generated library. [1] https://github.com/gentoo-science/eselect Sebastien