W dniu śro, 30.08.2017 o godzinie 10∶48 -0700, użytkownik Zac Medico napisał: > On 08/30/2017 02:06 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > The value of get_libdir depends on the profile, and so it is not useful > > for dependency calculations. Furthermore, it seems that Portage does > > not handle defining it in global scope well due to EAPI checking magic. > > Ban it completely where it is defined as EAPI function to let developers > > catch their mistakes early rather than see them as 'command not found' > > errors during dependency calculation / cache updates. > > > > Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/629010 > > --- > > bin/ebuild.sh | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/bin/ebuild.sh b/bin/ebuild.sh > > index a400ef72e..f1ac3f278 100755 > > --- a/bin/ebuild.sh > > +++ b/bin/ebuild.sh > > @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ else > > use useq usev use_with use_enable" > > ___eapi_has_usex && funcs+=" usex" > > ___eapi_has_in_iuse && funcs+=" in_iuse" > > + ___eapi_has_get_libdir && funcs+=" get_libdir" > > # These functions die because calls to them during the "depend" phase > > # are considered to be severe QA violations. > > funcs+=" best_version has_version portageq" > > > > It's possible that there are working ebuilds that call get_libdir in > global scope. Have we done an analysis of the ebuilds in the gentoo > repository? Obviously, it would be safer to call eqawarn.
If there were any (more), we'd have caught them during cache regen, wouldn't we? When I accidentally left it when bumping to EAPI 6, I've got a bug report almost immediately. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
