On 09:37 Wed 21 Sep , Alec Warner wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:
Not really, because when you update a bundled lib you actually make
your whole app compile with it. People change the APIs of eclasses
and then just let every internal
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 09:37 Wed 21 Sep , Alec Warner wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org
wrote:
Not really, because when you update a bundled lib you actually make
your whole app compile
On 18:04 Thu 22 Sep , Alec Warner wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:
I do, because I don't have time to deal with other people breaking
my packages, whether they're in gentoo-x86, the science overlay, or
my personal one. I've got more
On 14:20 Tue 20 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:16:46PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
OK, so the implication of what you're saying is that everything in
eutils.eclass, base.eclass, toolchain-funcs.eclass,
flag-o-matic.eclass, versionator.eclass, multilib.eclass,
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 14:20 Tue 20 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:16:46PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
OK, so the implication of what you're saying is that everything in
eutils.eclass, base.eclass,
since there's been no new feedback in a while, i'll add this to eutils.eclass
in a while:
usex() { use $1 echo ${2-yes}$4 || echo ${3-no}$5 ; }
then once it hits the PMS, i'll put EAPI wrapping around it.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:16:46PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 04:22 Sun 18 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:59:08PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 13:43 Fri 16 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
What I said from the getgo and you're missing is that pushing
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:59:08PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 13:43 Fri 16 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
What I said from the getgo and you're missing is that pushing EAPI
implementation into the tree and ignoring EAPI, or having this notion
that every repository must automatically
On 04:22 Sun 18 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:59:08PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 13:43 Fri 16 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
What I said from the getgo and you're missing is that pushing EAPI
implementation into the tree and ignoring EAPI, or having this
On 09/16/2011 02:06 AM, Brian Harring wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:00:19PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 17:29 Wed 14 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 02:16:41PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 19:14 Tue 13 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at
On 13:43 Fri 16 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
What I said from the getgo and you're missing is that pushing EAPI
implementation into the tree and ignoring EAPI, or having this notion
that every repository must automatically use gentoo-x86 (pushing the
format into the tree) is /wrong/;
I'm
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:00:19PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 17:29 Wed 14 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 02:16:41PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 19:14 Tue 13 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 09:02:28PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 02:06 Fri 16 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
Specious argument; the point of controllable stacking was to avoid the
issue of overlay's forcing their eclasses upon gentoo-x86 ebuilds
(which may not support those modified eclasses) via the old
PORTDIR_OVERLAY behaviour. This is why
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 07:30:14 -0500
Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:
Realistically I assume you're taking the stance EAPI gets in the
way, lets do away with it- if so, well, out with it, and I'll
dredge up the old logs/complaints that lead to EAPI.
I see EAPI as a nice thing
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 7:04 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 07:30:14 -0500
Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:
Realistically I assume you're taking the stance EAPI gets in the
way, lets do away with it- if so, well, out with it, and I'll
dredge up
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 07:30:14AM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 02:06 Fri 16 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
Specious argument; the point of controllable stacking was to avoid the
issue of overlay's forcing their eclasses upon gentoo-x86 ebuilds
(which may not support those modified
On 17:29 Wed 14 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 02:16:41PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 19:14 Tue 13 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 09:02:28PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 17:56 Tue 13 Sep , Mike Frysinger wrote:
useful
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 19:08:09 Brian Harring wrote:
Making it overridable seems wiser-
usex() {
local flag=$1
local tval=${2-yes}
local fval=${3-no}
if use $flag; then
echo ${tval}
else
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 02:02, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Mike Frysinger wrote:
usex() { use $1 echo ${2:-yes} || echo ${3:-no} ; }
You should omit the colons though. ${2-yes} and ${3-no} will allow for
an explicit empty string as argument, whereas the :- variants won't.
in
On 19:14 Tue 13 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 09:02:28PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 17:56 Tue 13 Sep , Mike Frysinger wrote:
useful enough for EAPI ? or should i just stick it into eutils.eclass
? OR BOTH !?
I prefer to avoid EAPI whenever
On 06:34 Wed 14 Sep , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:02:28 -0500
Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 17:56 Tue 13 Sep , Mike Frysinger wrote:
useful enough for EAPI ? or should i just stick it into
eutils.eclass ? OR BOTH !?
I prefer to avoid EAPI
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 02:16:41PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 19:14 Tue 13 Sep , Brian Harring wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 09:02:28PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 17:56 Tue 13 Sep , Mike Frysinger wrote:
useful enough for EAPI ? or should i just stick it into
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
i keep writing little helpers like this in ebuilds:
usex() { use $1 echo ${2:-yes} || echo ${3:-no} ; }
usex...you naughty boy.
this is so i can do:
export some_var=$(usex some_flag)
and get it set to yes or
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 06:13:10PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 18:01:25 Alec Warner wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
this is so i can do:
export some_var=$(usex some_flag)
and get it set to yes or no
If the intent
On 17:56 Tue 13 Sep , Mike Frysinger wrote:
useful enough for EAPI ? or should i just stick it into eutils.eclass
? OR BOTH !?
I prefer to avoid EAPI whenever possible, as it just makes things slower
and more complex.
--
Thanks,
Donnie
Donnie Berkholz
Council Member / Sr. Developer
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 09:02:28PM -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 17:56 Tue 13 Sep , Mike Frysinger wrote:
useful enough for EAPI ? or should i just stick it into eutils.eclass
? OR BOTH !?
I prefer to avoid EAPI whenever possible, as it just makes things slower
and more
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 19:08:09 Brian Harring wrote:
Making it overridable seems wiser-
usex() {
local flag=$1
local tval=${2-yes}
local fval=${3-no}
if use $flag; then
echo ${tval}
else
echo ${fval}
fi
}
i dont
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 22:02:28 Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 17:56 Tue 13 Sep , Mike Frysinger wrote:
useful enough for EAPI ? or should i just stick it into eutils.eclass
? OR BOTH !?
I prefer to avoid EAPI whenever possible, as it just makes things slower
and more complex.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:45:27PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 19:08:09 Brian Harring wrote:
Making it overridable seems wiser-
usex() {
local flag=$1
local tval=${2-yes}
local fval=${3-no}
if use $flag; then
echo
29 matches
Mail list logo
