On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:16:11 -0500 "Robert R. Russell" wrote: > If I understand the problem GLEP 55 is trying to solve correctly, it > stems from portage's assumption that an unknown EAPI is equal to EAPI > 0. Could that assumption be changed to an unknown EAPI is equal to > the latest supported EAPI. Now I understand that this change would > have to wait until all the ebuilds in the portage tree correctly > define their EAPI, but would the idea be technically feasible at > least excluding EAPI0 ebuilds? I think it would be if all EAPIs are > forward compatible up until the EAPI declaration in the ebuild. No, that still wouldn't help, because the package manager doesn't know that what it thinks is the 'latest' EAPI (not that there really is such a thing -- EAPIs aren't a linear sequence) actually is the 'latest' EAPI. -- Ciaran McCreesh