2012/5/22 Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org>: > On Monday 21 May 2012 18:16:25 Markos Chandras wrote: >> Excuse me but the way this change was handled is a bit depressing. >> First, the ebuilds should have been fixed to inherit eutils and then >> remove eutils from autotools. Now, a bunch of ebuilds are broken out >> of nowhere. I don't believe this issue was that urgent in order to >> justify the significant breakage of portage tree. > > you're assuming the breakage was intentional. i also wouldn't really describe > it as "significant", but that's just quibbling over an insignificant aspect.
It's intentional not to revert the change, it's significant because it involve a number of significant packages like icu, vim and boost, some of them already marked stable (from a fast grep from the one mentioned in the previous posts). > but what's done is done. fix the ebuilds and move on. > -mike revert - fix the ebuilds - re-apply could work too, or since you're an old and respected developer fix them yourself, the change is easy and probably mantainers will understand. Francesco R.
