On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 07:54:16AM +0200, Bernd Steinhauser wrote: > On 20/04/16 00:19, Kylie McClain wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Bernd Steinhauser wrote: > > > > Why a build_option? Why not a regular suboption or option? > > > > > > Just because I thought it fits into build_options. But that's the only > > > real > > > reason.
I don't particularly find this very convincing. But I suppose what it really boils down to is, whether we can come up with a description for that build_option which will always fit? If not, do we really want the exheres-0 interface to permit custom descriptions for a build_option? > > > (One of ) The reason against it would be that we currently just add a > > > normal > > > option "debug" if we handle something like that at all, but we could > > > switch > > > those over if we can define a general way how to do debug builds for > > > autotools and other build systems. And if we would want to, of course. > > > > > > No idea if there technical reasons against a build_options suboption and > > > for > > > regular suboptions, if there are, I'd like to know. > > > > My (admittedly limited) understanding of the situation is that build_options > > are not visible to the exheres environment. I remember hitting this whenever > > I was fixing a bug with dev-lang/go, because I wanted to try and make the > > package disable or fail if [build_options:dwarf_compress] was enabled, > > because it appears to break go binaries. If we were to do it, I think it would be an opt in build_option. Having the option makes no sense if the package in question doesn't do anything with it, so it should just declare when it does. > > That's the main technical reason, that and that I believe you'd have to > > actually dig into Paludis code to add options to build_options. So, that'd > > probably complicated it a lot more than it is worth. Not complicated. > > I think just adding a [debug] option to the cmake.exlib that changes the > > type of > > build would be more reasonable; we seem to use [debug] as the default > > option for > > enabling debug features, or things helpful for debugging programs that are > > changed at build time. > > > Well, then it might be better to just use the debug option. Maybe paludis > improves there at some point so we can integrate the debug option into > build_options globally, where, in principle, it belongs imo. But it's not > urgent. Still don't understand this principle. > Any opinion on the rest of the case? The rest? -- Bo Ørsted Andresen _______________________________________________ Exherbo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev
