On Fri, 4 May 2012 22:23:31 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > There's all kinds of reasons to not use autotools-utils.eclass. > > I wouldn't want to see another python.eclass bullying around the tree. > > 504 autotools-utils.eclass > 3186 python.eclass > > Do you have any real arguments? I think his point was that like the python eclass, autotools-utils requires you to give up a lot of control over your ebuild to it. It started out as a simple way to standardize common autotools-related tasks. Then it began growing and adding a bunch of stuff that, while I'm sure was useful to some, I didn't need or had to handle differently. Then these features started becoming interdependent and I started getting bug reports about how my packages were misusing the eclass because I didn't want to cede full control over to its phase functions. Don't get me wrong, I understand the reasons why it has to work the way it does and I'm sure most people are fine with it. But I'm wary about giving that much power over to an eclass I can't control. I hate exported phase functions in general though, so read into that what you will. -- fonts, gcc-porting toolchain, wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
