On 21.2.2010 14.17, Zac Medico wrote: > On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote: >> On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEPT_LICENSE support, we >>> can think about deprecating check_license [1]. This will allow us to >>> avoid using PROPERTIES=interactive in cases when it is due to >>> check_license alone, since anything with a license in the @EULA >>> license group is automatically masked by the default >>> ACCEPT_LICENSE="* -...@eula" portage configuration [2]. >>> >>> [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=299095 >>> [2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=302645 >> >> We could handle it like deprecating ebeep and epause. With EAPI=4 don't >> define the function any more and the Portage version will be >> sufficiently new to have ACCEPT_LICENSE. > > That's a good idea. However, we may want to deprecate check_license > it starting with EAPI=3 since the corresponding portage versions > already support ACCEPT_LICENSE.
Likely there wouldn't be any breakage with it doing it in EAPI 3 but it would be against the eclass contract of not changing expected behavior. Would be a win-win situation if we would get EAPI 4 :) Regards, Petteri
