Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds

[Marc Schiffbauer <mschiff@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1229 bytes --]

* Ulrich Mueller schrieb am 08.03.12 um 08:27 Uhr:
> >>>>> On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Alec Warner wrote:
> 
> >> *** Proposal 1: "Parse the EAPI assignment statement" ***
> >> [...]
> 
> > I don't like this idea because the sane way should be easy and
> > straightforward. Mixing a constant declaration with bash assignment
> > just confuses users who think the assignment is full bash when in
> > fact it is not.
> 
> > EAPI=$(somefunc)
> > EAPI=${SOMEVAR%%-*}
> > and so forth all don't meet the regex (and would be flagged
> > invalid.) However a naive author might think they work.
> 
> Such constructs also cannot be used with any of the other proposed
> solutions. And in fact, nobody is using such things in practice.
> _All_ ebuilds in the Portage tree can be successfully parsed with the
> regexp proposed.

Ebuilds are bash scripts. I think introducing exceptions or
constraints here is not straightforward.

I think the only relevant part whether EAPI is set correctly or not
should be the outcome of $EAPI.

I would vote for a solution in a bash comment where repoman would
have to check for its existance and equality to $EAPI.

-Marc
-- 
8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317  3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]