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 1S5gpC-0007Nd-JV for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 17:08:22 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A633E0935; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 17:08:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 286DAE0925 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 17:07:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.42.250] (staff-wireless.saddleback.edu [209.129.85.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C54171B401E for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 17:07:24 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F58E746.7040608@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:07:18 -0800 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120304 Thunderbird/10.0.1 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] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds References: <20311.51166.725757.212932@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20312.24445.451487.577826@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20120308094222.GA21435@lisa.schiffbauer.lan> <4F58DEC1.7080003@gentoo.org> <20120308163555.526d5e81@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120308163555.526d5e81@googlemail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 80005019-0db6-42e1-ae48-db12367f51ee X-Archives-Hash: 1538b6bfe8a0c1a87025eac334971405 On 03/08/2012 08:35 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 08:30:57 -0800 > Zac Medico wrote: >> On 03/08/2012 01:42 AM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote: >>> * Ulrich Mueller schrieb am 08.03.12 um 08:27 Uhr: >>>> 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. >> >> Given that ebuilds already have to conform to a vast number of >> constraints that ordinary bash scripts do not. I think that it's >> perfectly reasonable for ebuilds to have a constrained syntax for >> EAPI assignments. > > ...and only EAPI assignments? Not for any other metadata variable? It's only needed for the EAPI, since that's the only value defined by the ebuild that we intend to use to control how the global environment is initialized prior to sourcing of the ebuild. > Doesn't that sort of suggest that EAPI shouldn't be a metadata variable? It's a very special metadata variable. Of course, it could also be implemented in many different ways that do not involve bash variable assingments. Maybe the differences between the various possible ways truly make a difference to some people, but to me it's just hair-splitting [1]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivial_objections -- Thanks, Zac