Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 533958 - document EXTRA_ECONF as user-configuration feature in PMS
Summary: document EXTRA_ECONF as user-configuration feature in PMS
Status: CONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Hosted Projects
Classification: Unclassified
Component: PMS/EAPI (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal enhancement (vote)
Assignee: PMS/EAPI
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2014-12-29 18:39 UTC by Julian Ospald
Modified: 2021-03-10 03:55 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Julian Ospald 2014-12-29 18:39:25 UTC
...and explicitly state that it must not be set from within ebuilds/eclasses.

Afais both portage and paludis already support this env variable. I'm not sure about pkgcore.
Comment 1 Julian Ospald 2014-12-29 18:40:04 UTC
maybe even EXTRA_EMAKE...
Comment 2 Tim Harder gentoo-dev 2014-12-31 04:37:17 UTC
(In reply to Julian Ospald (hasufell) from comment #0)
> Afais both portage and paludis already support this env variable. I'm not
> sure about pkgcore.

pkgcore supports both EXTRA_ECONF and EXTRA_EMAKE set via profile or package.env since it inherited its bash code base from portage back in 2006 or whenever.
Comment 3 Julian Ospald 2015-10-26 01:43:16 UTC
any interest here or can I close as DONTCARE?
Comment 4 Ulrich Müller gentoo-dev 2015-10-26 07:26:47 UTC
It is a more general question if we want to add user configuration to PMS's scope.

So far, section 1.1 says:
"This document does not specify any user or package manager configuration information."
Comment 5 Julian Ospald 2015-10-26 11:50:01 UTC
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #4)
> It is a more general question if we want to add user configuration to PMS's
> scope.
> 
> So far, section 1.1 says:
> "This document does not specify any user or package manager configuration
> information."

I think the initial intention was just something like

"ebuilds and eclasses must not set EXTRA_ECONF", which isn't particularly user configuration documentation, but it's debatable whether it belongs in the spec.