From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J4k5S-0007c0-UQ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:34:51 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with SMTP id lBILXB7e019693; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:33:11 GMT Received: from corwin.easynet.fr (smarthost168.mail.easynet.fr [212.180.1.168]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id lBILUxIj017133 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:30:59 GMT Received: from easyconnect2121138-64.clients.easynet.fr ([212.11.38.64] helo=eusebe) by corwin.easynet.fr with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1J4k1i-0008OK-Q8 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:30:59 +0100 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:30:31 +0100 From: Thomas de Grenier de Latour To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI) Message-ID: <20071218223031.0dd51d1c@eusebe> In-Reply-To: <20071218072911.49fa1f3f@blueyonder.co.uk> References: <200712172320.01988.peper@gentoo.org> <47671006.2020808@gentoo.org> <20071218001855.78c1864c@blueyonder.co.uk> <18279.29725.449851.982897@a1ihome1.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20071218072911.49fa1f3f@blueyonder.co.uk> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.1.0 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 8ed618b3-2d1e-43c8-8e27-69a750d40aae X-Archives-Hash: f15651fcbc3e5d0f23c23b45cda92347 On 2007/12/18, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Well, users shouldn't really be doing anything with .ebuild files... As a user, i often end reading part of some ebuilds to get a clue about what the generic "foo" USE flag does in a particular package ("qgrep -A3 -B2 -Nx '\' cat/pkg-ver" or alike). > Or if by users you mean developers, I'd say it's considerably less > inconvenient than having to remember arbitrary syntax restrictions... "EAPI=foo must come first" is only one restriction, not several. It's really easy enough to remember, and devs are more or less about to conform to it anyway (since EAPI must come prior to "inherits", and it's in skel.ebuild, etc.). It's also easy for package managers to remind it as soon a dev tries to do anything with an offending ebuild he has just written. So please don't make it sound overly complicated when it's not. You call my proposal a "nasty hack", but seriously, GLEP55's way of putting one particular metadata in the file name rather than the file contents whereas it's not discriminating for atoms (the reason you need to forbid "foo-1.ebuild-blah" and "foo-1.ebuild-booh" existing in the same dir) is at least as ugly (well, at least it's debatable). And yes, you can answer that there are already such rules in application, like "foo-1-r0.ebuild" not being allowed together with "foo-1.ebuild", but my answer would be that's it's not a reason to make things worst. In my ideal world, there shouldn't exists several equal versions with different syntaxes(-r0 would not exists, _p would be less than _p0, etc.), and a versionned atom should only correspond to one single possible file name. -- TGL. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list