On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:27:03 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >> b) Does it really matter?
> >
> > In the grand scheme of things, no. In the grand scheme of things,
> > you only *need* a single src_ function. From a maintainer
> > convenience perspective, ho
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 11:31:17PM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> [...]
> > The benefit is that it's a logically separate action, and will avoid
> > all the silliness of people repeatedly changing their minds about
> > whi
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:31:17 +0530
Arun Raghavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > The benefit is that it's a logically separate action, and will avoid
> > all the silliness of people repeatedly changing their minds about
> > which phase should do the eautoreconf calls and so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[...]
> The benefit is that it's a logically separate action, and will avoid
> all the silliness of people repeatedly changing their minds about
> which phase should do the eautoreconf calls and so on.
a) Is this really an issue
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Steve Long
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> If you're doing new phases... Exheres has been using src_prepare, after
>> src_unpack, to avoid having lots of things of the form:
>>
>> src_unpack() {
>> default
>> patch blah
>> eautore
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:18:33 -0700
> Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> * The old src_compile phase function is split into separate
>>src_configure and src_compile fuctions.
>
> If you're doing new phases... Exheres has been using src_prepare, after
> src_unpac
