On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 01:15:45PM +0100, Micha?? G??rny wrote: > And in case anyone wondered, the output looks like this: > > * PYTHON_TARGETS <-> USE_PYTHON inconsistency found. This may result > * in missing modules when trying to use Python packages. Please ensure > * that the same implementations are listed in both variables. > * > * Implementation python2_5 disabled but 2.5 in USE_PYTHON > * Implementation python3_1 disabled but 3.1 in USE_PYTHON > * Implementation jython2_5 enabled but 2.5-jython not in USE_PYTHON
If you're going to complain to users about flags being disabled in USE_PYTHON, use the actual flag name. Also... hopefully you typo'd, but 2.5-jython? Where was it decided the naming there was being shifted around? None of the code in the eclasses backs that text up from what I can tell. As floppym said; this flag isn't documented, so you're making it fairly hard to actually comment/review on what you're doing here- we just see glimpses of random patches, without knowing exactly what you intend overall. Documenting your end goal (moving people to USE_PYTHON? etc) is kind of necessary; normal rules of review reply, you want reviews, you make sure your reviewers know wtf you're trying to do and ultimately why. ~harring
