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 1J5Hdg-0002Rg-9i for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:24:24 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with SMTP id lBK9MfTB006021; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:22:41 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id lBK9JnUq001848 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:19:49 GMT Received: from gentoo.org (c-67-171-150-177.hsd1.or.comcast.net [67.171.150.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75B1F65A38 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:19:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 01:19:46 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI) Message-ID: <20071220091946.GA13390@supernova> References: <200712172320.01988.peper@gentoo.org> <20071220003801.GL24034@supernova> <20071220082938.4bf4cf3b@blueyonder.co.uk> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071220082938.4bf4cf3b@blueyonder.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-Archives-Salt: 01e38cfd-fa4a-441a-a391-4c7e31ee3b82 X-Archives-Hash: b8b3ba5f444070994c9e757215c7a628 On 08:29 Thu 20 Dec , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:38:01 -0800 > Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > Here's some other ideas for how to express EAPI. What if we: > > > > Used EAPI-named subdirectories instead of tagging it into the > > filename? > > Performance hit, and otherwise equivalent to using suffixes. Not quite so ugly-looking to my eyes. > > Used (and required) filesystem extended attributes? > > Unportable, unsyncable and unmaintainable. Unportable to filesystems that don't support extended attributes isn't very interesting to me, unless they're common. Out of curiosity, do you know which ones that would be? Looking at my kernel config, ext3 and reiser explicitly support xattrs, and I see jfs and xfs have acls and security labels, which might be usable. Unsyncable would be a problem, so it's a good thing rsync has USE=xattr -- do the difficulties come in on the CVS side? Why do you say unmaintainable? > > Stuck ranges into metadata.xml for which EAPIs applied? > > No package manager required information can be in XML format. Says who? Us. We can change that, if we decide it's the best answer. =) Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list