On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 09:15:50 +0200
Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:

> That said, I don't find the current solution really optimal. A lot of
> ebuilds (mine, for example) are not using elibtoolize, and I expect
> that they may randomly fail for some people in corner cases. But I
> don't feel like adding another eclass to all ebuilds in the tree is
> a good idea.
> Portage already does some configure updates in econf. How about we
> move the whole thing straight into Portage, implicitly activated by
> econf? That would certainly increase coverage, remove some QA
> violations from ECLASSDIR and possibly solve the problem long-term.
> What do you think?

I support this. I don't know if it's as big a problem as it was when I
last looked at it but cross-compiling often failed without the sysroot
patch. Much like you, before becoming a dev, I did not want to file a
whole string of bug reports requesting that elibtoolize be added to
loads of ebuilds.

James Le Cuirot (chewi)
Gentoo Linux Developer

Reply via email to