From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M5GgR-0005wI-9r for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 16 May 2009 09:59:59 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C22CFE03A5; Sat, 16 May 2009 09:59:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ew0-f165.google.com (mail-ew0-f165.google.com [209.85.219.165]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CDC1E03AA for ; Sat, 16 May 2009 09:59:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy9 with SMTP id 9so2966228ewy.34 for ; Sat, 16 May 2009 02:59:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; bh=ToRa9nYz9TElnwZ68UP//72dYuaY07vUc/g6Fu9Zkr4=; b=TWN/Aq5+YwsvAV8iz7xZSZgL/38c1xIJYfBzr1/p3E1hW9sy7Ch/lz1VW7D11732E8 VG3kSbsvZP+S+DS76NXG04N0YeBHJgUKc42m9DBoIzgjl8UaSM0vAZKk9Dj6PO/4hRag 6fcp0YJFDHi7LuiMDAejijkjFZY0UKvdw0PnI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :message-id; b=LpAaM66L6gzC2r7zzws4I9rNeu/L1BYvcNAdzTajw3VFXHGgZkZPhsZNNYg1Xx4jzK cMdSMEeN6YNN+LdmMZN2SJNJprfbPY9VNnkdXNSa6xT7D6H3Yjc+dzVRzB4TLp58QS5P 92E1zTbAQrxwBdLH7/0KqBcEDdI0e4VeM+veQ= Received: by 10.210.53.1 with SMTP id b1mr1994356eba.19.1242467996800; Sat, 16 May 2009 02:59:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.0.3? (5ad1a916.bb.sky.com [90.209.169.22]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 5sm1557879eyh.30.2009.05.16.02.59.55 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 16 May 2009 02:59:56 -0700 (PDT) From: David Leverton To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] The fallacies of GLEP55 Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 10:59:53 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <200905142006.51998.patrick@gentoo.org> <20090515204905.54aa6a5c@snowmobile> <4A0E8717.5070600@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4A0E8717.5070600@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200905161059.53706.levertond@googlemail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 6555c30a-99f9-4e73-8ad8-25ca05c37b3b X-Archives-Hash: 09ec5971264243fb0085714d3e19fabf On Saturday 16 May 2009 10:27:51 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote: > How is it possible to do these things encoded in the filename? For the export example, it's just a matter of using a different bash syntax from what the magic regex expects, which is completely irrelevant if it goes in the filename instead. For the versionator one, you would change the extension at the same time that you changed the version, removing the need to modify the file contents. But the point isn't that we want to be able to do those things. The point is that if the EAPI is in the filename, it's blatantly obvious that it has to be static, but adding strange and unintuitive restrictions on which shell constructs can be used is, well, strange and unintuitive.