Dnia 2014-08-18, o godz. 09:22:46 Chris Reffett <creff...@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
> On 8/18/2014 8:56 AM, hasufell wrote: > > Almost forgot, of course this does not work if you expect > > unpacker_src_unpacker() to run: > > inherit unpacker games base > > > > as well as > > inherit unpacker base games > > > > however > > inherit games unpacker base > > > > will work. > > > > And now... guess why the games herd made it a policy to always inherit > > games.eclass last. Because of the unpredictability of eclasses and that > > they may randomly add exported phase functions. It's a bit paranoid, but > > understandable, since we don't have any real rules here. > > > > So in the end 3 eclasses all tell you "inherit me last! really!". Good > > luck with figuring out how to make a gnome game with python and multilib > > support work together. I can predict the days such a review would take > > in #gentoo-sunrise. Not less than 3. > > > Would it be feasible to add a repoman check for situations like this, > where the behavior of a phase is dependent on inherit order? If so, it > seems reasonable to me to require explicit calls to eclass functions in > these cases to make it clear what's being called when. Right now, we have no kind of repoman for eclasses. If you have time to work on such a thing, please do. Otherwise, all we can do is put more checks in ebuilds but that triggers the warning for the wrong people... -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
