From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E7bI2-0008Eu-2A for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:06:18 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7NG4Hd1004262; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:04:17 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7NG18tJ022319 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:01:08 GMT Received: from cpe-65-26-255-237.wi.res.rr.com ([65.26.255.237] helo=nightcrawler) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1E7bDs-0003YO-To for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:02:01 +0000 Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:00:45 -0500 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] EBUILD_FORMAT support Message-ID: <20050823160045.GJ10816@nightcrawler> References: <20050707002002.GH20687@lightning.stealer.net> <1120758726.18019.6.camel@supernova.lan.local> <20050707204223.GB15563@curie-int.orbis-terrarum.net> <200508231520.16966.pauldv@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Ou5B7nmexOOGXbzo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200508231520.16966.pauldv@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Archives-Salt: 4315e86c-f626-45e3-a579-ab2e7981140c X-Archives-Hash: f3a97be20a1c8f3352d9524e84c34e37 --Ou5B7nmexOOGXbzo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 03:20:16PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > To allow for this to work with current portage versions, perhaps it would= =20 > be an option to introduce a new extension for .ebuild scripts that use=20 > it's functionality. That would allow all non-EAPI aware portage versions= =20 > to automatically ignore ebuilds that use this. not much for .ebuild? in the tree, personally. Why? Cause portage *should not* ignore those ebuilds. If the user=20 wants to merge something that is a later ebuild api then they have, at=20 least portage chucks an exception that the UI can wrap into "upgrade=20 portage". With what you're proposing, we instead get bugs about portage missing=20 packages. > ps. I would also suggest requiring that EAPI can be retrieved by a simple= =20 > line by line parsing without using bash. (This allows for changing the=20 > parsing system) No, that's yanks EAPI setting away from eclasses. Only time this would be required is if we move away from bash; if that=20 occurs, then I'd think a new extension would be required. As is, shifting the 'template' loaded for an ebuild can be done in=20 ebd's init_environ easy enough, so no reason to add the extra=20 restrictions/changes. My 2 cents, at least ;) ~harring --Ou5B7nmexOOGXbzo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDC0gtvdBxRoA3VU0RAlmOAKDH3rInKUWBT4HG5XubVisKbYSwhQCg7b/3 vol70z5X5dkYl3NBaFFstXs= =Li6T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Ou5B7nmexOOGXbzo-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list