On 30/10/12 23:16, Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 30-10-2012 15:47:51 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Fabian Groffen <grob...@gentoo.org> wrote:
On 30-10-2012 19:08:39 +0000, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Added: udev.eclass
Log:
New eclass to determine udevdir from udev.pc pkg-config file as requested by
many people, without ML review due to unproductive feedback
Uhm...
Please, stop doing this!
Stop the bike shedding. Provide real constructive improvements. I'm
not copying and pasting the same hunk of code in a bunch of ebuilds.
We just have policies. It is a bad habit to believe one is not affected
by them.
Samuli just introduced an eclass for which he had to make at least two
commits now right after its introduction to fix issues, and still it has
incorrect code, that should be fixed. (So far he just ignored the issue.)
One of the commits was before anything was said to ML (the EAPI change),
the comment was later but the commenter didn't notice it just got fixed
minutes before that.
I didn't ignore anything, but pointed this thread and the comments to
mgorny since the exact same EPREFIX code is in systemd.eclass too. If
you think this is incorrect, I would expect prefix@ maintainers to
provide a patch to correct it.
And as I already pointed out, i'll be reusing the internal function
later on in the ebuild just like systemd.eclass does, like for example,
$(udev_do_rules_d) function.
We discussed also the conversion from echo to printf and saw it unnecessary.
So exactly what is (your) problem with the current eclass now?
