Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2009, 11:24 -0700 schrieb Donnie Berkholz: > On 10:01 Sun 08 Mar , Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > On 16:48 Sun 08 Mar , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 09:42:29 -0700 > > > Donnie Berkholz <dberkh...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > - I understand the reasoning for the SRC_CONFIGURE_WITH blah stuff. I > > > > strongly oppose this implementation because it makes ebuilds less > > > > like bash scripts that are easy to understand. Instead I suggest > > > > extending use_with() and use_enable() to accept multiple sets of > > > > arguments (alternately, making custom, similar functions that will > > > > take multiple args). > > > > > > How would that work? I can't see an obvious way of doing it that isn't > > > more or less as verbose as just using multiple calls. > > > > It would just eliminate all but one call to use_with(). Depending on how > > many you've got, this can shorten things up a fair bit. Here's an > > example: > > > > econf \ > > $(use_with 'x X' 'foo libfoo' 'bar' 'python pygtk') > > econf \ > > $(use_with x X) \ > > $(use_with foo libfoo) \ > > $(use_with bar) \ > > $(use_with python pygtk) > > And the straightforward evolution of this would be additional with() and > enable() functions for mandatory support. I still find this more > intuitive than the set of variables. > > econf \ > $(use_with 'x X' 'foo libfoo' 'bar' 'python pygtk') \ > $(with foo bar blah baz) \ > $(enable bam paw tick) >
Which could already be written as ...
econf --with-{foo,bar}
using bash :-)
(or did I miss the point?)
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
