On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 14:09:17 -0700
Zac Medico <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 08/14/2012 01:54 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 21:45:56 +0100
> > Ciaran McCreesh <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:44:49 +0200
> >> Michał Górny <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> As some of you may have noticed, lately introduced 'double include
> >>> preventions' have caused changes in effective phase functions in a
> >>> few ebuilds. Also, often it is undesirable that change in inherits
> >>> of an eclass may cause an undesired change of exported functions.
> >>
> >> The problem here is that eclasses aren't clearly split between
> >> "utility" and "does stuff", so people are inheriting "does stuff"
> >> eclasses to get utilities. The fix is to stop having stupidly huge
> >> complicated eclasses; changing inherit behaviour is just
> >> wallpapering over the gaping hole.
> 
> Ciaran's assessment sounds pretty accurate to me.
> 
> > Soo, how do you propose to handle bug 422533 without changing
> > inherit behavior?
> 
> Close it as WONTFIX. The ifndef thing that we're doing now seems like
> a reasonable approach.

But you're aware that this 'reasonable approach' just made the whole
problem by changing exported functions, right?

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to