[gentoo-dev] Re: bzr.eclass into Portage

[Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org>]

>>>>> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Steve Long wrote:

> No objections, a minor point wrt bash:

> EBZR_OPTIONS="${EBZR_OPTIONS:-}" (and similar variants)
> doesn't do anything (beyond waste lex and yacc time.)

It does something, namely assigns an empty string if the variable was
undefined before. ;-) git.eclass and mercurial.eclass do
: ${EGIT_OPTIONS:=}
which has the same effect.

I've left these statements in for now, since I don't see how they
could harm. Does anyone else have an opinion here? I'm not really
decided about this point.

> [[ -z ${EBZR_REPO_URI} ]] && die ..
> Here's how I'd write that:
> [[ $EBZR_REPO_URI ]] || die ..

Applied. (However, I didn't remove the curly braces which are Gentoo
"house style".)

> I've heard the "be explicit" argument before (hey antarus;) and
> here's why I disagree:
> If you don't know test (''help test'') and what its default is, then
> you really don't know the basics of shellscript (you possibly only
> think you do.) If you don't know shell, and can't begin to
> understand what that might do, then you shouldn't consider coding as
> a career, and I'd expect you to take quite a while to go through the
> #bash crucible; if you ever make it I'd have a lot of time for you.

Don't use a sledgehammer to crack a nut. The above is purely a
question of coding style and personal preferences.

> Given that, is there any reason not to use 1.6 if installed, and
> fallback to an earlier version if not?

Of course not. The dependency is DEPEND=">=dev-util/bzr-1.5".

Ulrich