On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:48:21 -0400
Chris Reffett <[email protected]> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 06/13/2013 06:37 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> >> At the beginning of July, the KDE team will be removing EAPI 0/1
> >> support from cmake-utils.eclass and inlining the functions from
> >> base.eclass in order to remove that inherit [1].
> >
> > So, instead of fixing what you consider wrong in base.eclass, you
> > inline it so that if someone improves base.eclass he has to do it
> > for cmake-utils too?
> >
> We did not actually inline most of the complicated logic from
> base.eclass, as to the best of my knowledge epatch itself will handle
> all of the corner cases that base_src_prepare covers. The new patching
> code essentially consists of [[ ${PATCHES[@]} ]] && epatch
> "${PATCHES[@]}"; epatch_user.
that kind of stuff sounds more like it should be factorized rather than
copied all around; be it base.eclass, an EAPI, or another eclass I
don't really care.
there's also a base_src_install_docs call in current cmake-utils.eclass
Alexis.
