>>>>> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 2015-10-17, o godz. 14:19:15 > "Jason A. Donenfeld" <[email protected]> napisał(a):
>> What's the story of eapply? Why does this need to go into the PMS, >> and not continue to be supplied by epatch from the eclass? What >> is gained from moving it to PMS, and why is it more semantically >> correct to have it there? Just curious about this. > There are two reasons: > 1. patching is quite common. The idea behind part of my additions > for EAPI 6 was to add really common and reusable things, so they > wouldn't have to be carried over in eclasses forever. Having eapply > in EAPI 6 means a fair number of ebuilds will not have to inherit > huge eutils. Also epatch will still be available in eutils.eclass for complicated cases. For example, eapply doesn't do autodetection of the path prefix depth, but is hardwired to -p1. Ulrich
pgpDdVQ584_dC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
