hopefully i didn't break anything before i go to sleep ;D
http://sources.gentoo.org/eclass/toolchain.eclass?r1=1.474&r2=1.475
http://sources.gentoo.org/eclass/eutils.eclass?r1=1.366&r2=1.367
-mike
On Thursday 20 October 2011 16:01:01 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
> On 10/20/11 9:22 PM, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > alright, use_if_iuse. That's my last bikeshed for today.
>
> I think this is the best one. I didn't really like any of the previously
> proposed names, but this one is good.
yeah, this
On 10/20/11 9:22 PM, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> alright, use_if_iuse. That's my last bikeshed for today.
I think this is the best one. I didn't really like any of the previously
proposed names, but this one is good.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 12:22 Thu 20 Oct , Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 20 October 2011 11:58:44 Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > On 01:26 Thu 20 Oct , Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 19 October 2011 15:40:50 Brian Harring wrote:
> > > > Name's a bit off though considering if the host was amd64, `huse
On Thursday 20 October 2011 11:58:44 Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 01:26 Thu 20 Oct , Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 19 October 2011 15:40:50 Brian Harring wrote:
> > > Name's a bit off though considering if the host was amd64, `huse amd64`
> > > would return 1 since it's not in IUSE.
> >
On 01:26 Thu 20 Oct , Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 October 2011 15:40:50 Brian Harring wrote:
> > Name's a bit off though considering if the host was amd64, `huse amd64`
> > would return 1 since it's not in IUSE.
>
> good point. how about "iuse_use" ? or "use_iuse" ?
> -mike
use_
On Wednesday 19 October 2011 15:40:50 Brian Harring wrote:
> Name's a bit off though considering if the host was amd64, `huse amd64`
> would return 1 since it's not in IUSE.
good point. how about "iuse_use" ? or "use_iuse" ?
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message p
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:53:07 -0700
Brian Harring wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 02:05:50PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i wrote a new func for toolchain.eclass: huse. this is because the
> > toolchain.eclass supports multiple versions in parallel, and the
> > IUSE value can vary greatly b
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 03:26:21PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 October 2011 14:53:07 Brian Harring wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 02:05:50PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > i wrote a new func for toolchain.eclass: huse. this is because the
> > > toolchain.eclass supports
On Wednesday 19 October 2011 14:53:07 Brian Harring wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 02:05:50PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i wrote a new func for toolchain.eclass: huse. this is because the
> > toolchain.eclass supports multiple versions in parallel, and the IUSE
> > value can vary greatly b
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 02:05:50PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i wrote a new func for toolchain.eclass: huse. this is because the
> toolchain.eclass supports multiple versions in parallel, and the IUSE value
> can vary greatly between them. so doing `use foo` without checking IUSE
> first
On Wednesday 19 October 2011 14:05:50 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> now that we have "in_iuse" in eutils.eclass (with all the caveats), i'll be
> adding huse:
> huse() {
> in_iuse $1 || return 1
> use $1
> }
actually, after posting this, "iuse" is probably a bette
i wrote a new func for toolchain.eclass: huse. this is because the
toolchain.eclass supports multiple versions in parallel, and the IUSE value
can vary greatly between them. so doing `use foo` without checking IUSE first
doesn't work. since i got a request to use this in other eclasses (for t
13 matches
Mail list logo
