>>>>> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015, hasufell wrote: >> 2. eapply_user really belongs in the PM, especially if it's run by >> default. And it needs patch applying function. And if we have to >> implement patch applying function anyway, we may as well make it >> public to avoid unnecessary duplication.
> Unreliable. The ebuild may define its own src_prepare function That eapply_user is called can be enforced by repoman, or by a QA warning. > or the PM might define eapply_user as a no-op, which is valid as > per PMS. Sure, it is implementation defined. Otherwise PMS would have to specify all the details, e.g. where does the package manager look for user-supplied patches and how are patch directories organised. Ulrich
pgpG5Py_ptLhN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
