Zac Medico wrote:
Isn't that just a consequence of how autotools works? Do you have a
better alternative?
Maaaybe letting the package manager know how to run autotools if
necessary? There's already built-in autotools knowledge in that econf
is in practice autotools-specific. On the other ha
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:41:32 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:
> On 04/18/2012 11:34 AM, David Leverton wrote:
> > Zac Medico wrote:
> >> Also, maybe apply_user_patches_here should have a special return
> >> value if there are no patches to be applied? That way, src_prepare
> >> can avoid an eautoreconf ca
On 04/18/2012 11:34 AM, David Leverton wrote:
Zac Medico wrote:
Also, maybe apply_user_patches_here should have a special return value
if there are no patches to be applied? That way, src_prepare can avoid
an eautoreconf call if there are no patches.
Does that imply that every ebuild for an au
Zac Medico wrote:
Also, maybe apply_user_patches_here should have a special return value
if there are no patches to be applied? That way, src_prepare can avoid
an eautoreconf call if there are no patches.
Does that imply that every ebuild for an autotools-based package would
be expected to hav
On 04/18/2012 10:41 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:39:59 -0400
Mike Frysinger wrote:
i'm not sure splitting patches out of src_prepare into a dedicated
src_patch step would benefit that much. often times, you need to
mangle the code before/after patching.
Right. If we were
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:39:59 -0400
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i'm not sure splitting patches out of src_prepare into a dedicated
> src_patch step would benefit that much. often times, you need to
> mangle the code before/after patching.
Right. If we were going to take the EAPI route with this, the
On Wednesday 18 April 2012 12:59:13 Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 01:35:40 -0700 Zac Medico wrote:
> > Funtoo has support for FEATURES=localpatch, which does the epatch_user
> > thing before src_prepare. I think it should really go after
> > src_prepare, in order to apply patches afte
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 01:35:40 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:
> Funtoo has support for FEATURES=localpatch, which does the epatch_user
> thing before src_prepare. I think it should really go after
> src_prepare, in order to apply patches after those that src_prepare
> may apply (avoiding possible conflict
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 17:19:18 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 03:55:58PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > What if some patches are applied conditionally?
>
> imo patches that are applied conditionally should be rewritten so they
> can always be applied.
>
> patches that a
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 03:55:58PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> What if some patches are applied conditionally?
imo patches that are applied conditionally should be rewritten so they
can always be applied.
patches that are applied conditionally probably won't get into upsream
most of the time.
On Sunday 15 April 2012 04:16:41 Ryan Hill wrote:
> Is there any reason why this couldn't just be done in the package manager,
> making user patches available for all ebuilds without code changes?
i originally added it to eutils eclass and only called it in some ebuilds
because people were agains
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 02:16:41 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> Right now we have support in some packages for user patches - those
> being patches dropped into /etc/portage/patches/pkgname/ - which are
> automatically applied. Because this feature is implemented by
> epatch_user() in eutils.eclass, it is
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:00:10 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" wrote:
> > Right now we have support in some packages for user patches - those
> > being patches dropped into /etc/portage/patches/pkgname/ - which are
> > automatically applied. Because this feature is implemented by
> > epatch_user() in
>
> Right now we have support in some packages for user patches - those being
> patches dropped into /etc/portage/patches/pkgname/ - which are
> automatically applied. Because this feature is implemented by
> epatch_user() in
> eutils.eclass, it is only available for ebuilds that inherit eutils and
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 16:53:04 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 04/15/12 16:16, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Right now we have support in some packages for user patches - those being
> > patches dropped into /etc/portage/patches/pkgname/ - which are automatically
> > applied. Because this feature is implem
Right now we have support in some packages for user patches - those being
patches dropped into /etc/portage/patches/pkgname/ - which are automatically
applied. Because this feature is implemented by epatch_user() in
eutils.eclass, it is only available for ebuilds that inherit eutils and
explicitly
On 04/15/12 16:16, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Right now we have support in some packages for user patches - those being
> patches dropped into /etc/portage/patches/pkgname/ - which are automatically
> applied. Because this feature is implemented by epatch_user() in
> eutils.eclass, it is only available fo
On 04/15/2012 01:16 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Right now we have support in some packages for user patches - those being
> patches dropped into /etc/portage/patches/pkgname/ - which are automatically
> applied. Because this feature is implemented by epatch_user() in
> eutils.eclass, it is only availab
18 matches
Mail list logo
