>>>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2017, Alexis Ballier wrote:

>> Or do you have any concrete evidence that has_m64 is still used?

> Nope. It is just that it is part of an API that we export and, since
> we have easy means to drop it properly, why not doing so ? Esp. since
> dropping it "improperly" doesn't seem to bring any advantage.

But we don't have such means. Moving it into an EAPI conditional means
that we don't drop it but keep the code forever (and even add more
complexity).

> The 5 years deprecation is irrelevant here: With C libraries, you
> deprecate a symbol/function for a few years then bump soname when
> dropping it. The equivalent here is removing it in a new EAPI after
> a deprecation period.

That's not equivalent. For C libraries there are releases and the code
gets actually removed.

Anyway, I don't care enough to waste my time on anything more complex
than the patch in my original posting. Let the eclass keep its stale
code then.

Ulrich

Attachment: pgpFinZiA6NCB.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to