On Friday 18 February 2005 09:18 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> No, but I might be demonstrating why epatch should be in its own eclass,
> and why eutils should be split up into several smaller eclasses with
> eutils being changed into a compatibility eclass which just inherits all
> these new smaller eclasses.

this really isnt worth the effort i dont think ...

Brian and i and others have talked in the past about the next logical step of 
breaking portage up into sep packages ... one of which will be all the neat 
little shell scripts like dolib/dobin/etc...

that will allow core people (like az and myself) to properly integrate epatch 
back into portage and out of the eclass
-mike

--
[email protected] mailing list

Reply via email to