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 1S5j5f-000309-Gv for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 19:33:32 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 30828E0961; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 19:33:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ww0-f41.google.com (mail-ww0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DCDCE0946 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 19:32:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wgbds1 with SMTP id ds1so1829877wgb.4 for ; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:32:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; bh=vYmx2BKDsjEsHPlGwnccx13o8AXvjuNuXlmMLxmnKBA=; b=fqzf7TlT8KRwcCMS14UJiy+GGkFp62YHr7OS/RmT184NHEXH3Kzw4/ZvDI79rfwj39 21T5qaso/z694zl34v5ivuyKA9MqAjqm9sqnrJx7gX5Oeeu8z7OOINTZs3tA+sPmO0fX 5qDLuxTGfhIYib+VEYinJDA9HIlSFtjZj4PKc0zWECkDwwKoT1rMr85tzKLxseDmpk0t RztFgCDB3TjexPVxB9W8C+CjmuRJy7y0JPcE3r8AasWBhBKBXDRphE69WxuFl7lPT28J FK6TS19PmmOopPZr8OM5RML9gKLrkcrSLLpL1zAgawcJqfJ0DSylWrYDfyt2GOoZzDxa D4eQ== Received: by 10.180.81.37 with SMTP id w5mr15511990wix.16.1331235152341; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:32:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (cpc13-broo7-2-0-cust130.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com. [82.9.16.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id be4sm12922670wib.8.2012.03.08.11.32.29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:32:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 19:31:16 +0000 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds Message-ID: <20120308193116.6f06f81d@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20313.1493.174995.341187@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> References: <20311.51166.725757.212932@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20312.24445.451487.577826@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <4F58CFE3.8070408@gentoo.org> <4F58DCA1.2040000@gentoo.org> <20120308162902.4bc8e352@googlemail.com> <1331225973.4519.21.camel@rook> <20120308170342.7d36d75e@googlemail.com> <20313.1493.174995.341187@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/vcH5.y1668M+lLtxGErEu.l"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 406a8049-8256-4570-acd8-9636cdbe51b9 X-Archives-Hash: 4d79bc6d468694f6a10a0800fdfb0fc2 --Sig_/vcH5.y1668M+lLtxGErEu.l Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 20:17:41 +0100 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > In one of them, removal of the old assignment statement had simply > been forgotten [1]. For the other two, the EAPI had been assigned by > an eclass [2], which we consider illegal anyway. ...and yet people do it. That and the violations of the HOMEPAGE rule tell you a lot about what happens when something is made syntactically valid but supposedly not legal. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/vcH5.y1668M+lLtxGErEu.l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk9ZCQ0ACgkQ96zL6DUtXhHyXQCaAz67q2CYACIwgwqVeGC4Atlu LdMAnitPia122+8jdVBq/I257yWhwMaG =E91b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/vcH5.y1668M+lLtxGErEu.l--