2012-05-22 01:01:04 Francesco Riosa napisał(a): > 2012/5/22 Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org>: > > On Monday 21 May 2012 18:16:25 Markos Chandras wrote: > >> Excuse me but the way this change was handled is a bit depressing. > >> First, the ebuilds should have been fixed to inherit eutils and then > >> remove eutils from autotools. Now, a bunch of ebuilds are broken out > >> of nowhere. I don't believe this issue was that urgent in order to > >> justify the significant breakage of portage tree. > > > > you're assuming the breakage was intentional. i also wouldn't really > > describe > > it as "significant", but that's just quibbling over an insignificant aspect. > > It's intentional not to revert the change, it's significant because it > involve a number of significant packages like icu, vim and boost
These packages are not involved: dev-libs/icu ebuilds do not inherit autotools.eclass. An older ebuild (icu-4.8.1.1-r1.ebuild) inherits eutils.eclass only through versionator.eclass. app-editors/vim ebuilds do not inherit autotools.eclass, and inherit vim.eclass, which inherits eutils.eclass. dev-libs/boost ebuilds do not inherit autotools.eclass, and inherit check-reqs.eclass, flag-o-matic.eclass and versionator.eclass, which inherit eutils.eclass. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
