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 1PI3qF-0000NX-9r for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 18:31:47 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C718EE0882; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 18:31:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EE8AE087B for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 18:31:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.151.200.61] (staff-wireless.saddleback.edu [209.129.85.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1239D1B40ED for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 18:31:36 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4CE17CBC.4060104@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 10:32:28 -0800 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101029 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.6 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI versioning of files in profiles References: <201011011806.52647.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <4CD0F089.5090107@gentoo.org> <201011151923.50200.Arfrever@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <201011151923.50200.Arfrever@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: d4904a19-b6f2-4f46-b8b7-35f6886a6064 X-Archives-Hash: 8830b45615f994f3b05240668171c309 On 11/15/2010 10:23 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > 2010-11-03 06:18:01 Zac Medico napisa=C5=82(a): >> When you need to use a new EAPI, why not just create a sub-profile tha= t >> uses the existing 'eapi' file support? For example, you could create >> 10.1 profiles that inherit from the 10.0 profiles, and put anything >> requiring the new EAPI in the 10.1 sub-profiles. >=20 > Your suggestion would require that hundreds of packages are manually ma= sked in base profile > and unmasked in this new subprofile. > E.g. it is planned that dev-python/setuptools will have "python_abis_2.= 5-jython" USE flag. > This flag should be masked on architectures, which don't support Java/J= ython. use.mask and > package.use.mask files in base profile don't support such a USE flag, s= o dev-python/setuptools > and all its (at least indirect) reverse dependencies would have to be m= asked in base profile. Why would they have to be masked, just to make repoman happy? Alternatively, we could simply deprecate the older profile and remove it from profiles.desc so that repoman doesn't check it anymore. It's desirable to remove old profiles from profiles.desc anyway, since we don't want them to slow down repoman. As for older package managers, the ebuilds with newer EAPIs are already automatically masked, so repoman is the only reason I can imagine that you'd want to mask them. > If a future EAPI allows a new character in package names, then my sugge= stion would allow to > handle such packages. >=20 --=20 Thanks, Zac