On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:49:17 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:36:41 -0400 > Mike Frysinger <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Monday 29 April 2013 01:55:49 Michał Górny wrote: > > > Now, what are your thoughts? Shall we fix PMS to explicitly state > > > the argument order or implement ugly hacks in ebuilds? > > > > portage has always inserted implicit args before the args given by > > the ebuild to econf. PMS omitting the ordering information is simply > > an oversight to be clarified, not functionality that may be relied > > upon. > > As you can see in the bug, we're not discussing anything related to EAPI > 0 behaviour, so this argument is irrelevant. We're discussing a change > in a later EAPI, where the change had nothing to say about ordering. There's a difference between 'we' and 'you alone'. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
