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 1S628X-0004tG-Tp for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:53:46 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 50B5DE09BC; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:53:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFAEAE099F for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:52:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.131] (CPE002401f30b73-CM001cea3ddad8.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.224.72.201]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: axs) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1BD451EC001 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:52:46 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F5A2744.9080209@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:52:36 -0500 From: Ian Stakenvicius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111220 Thunderbird/8.0 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> <4F57DDB5.3090503@orlitzky.com> <20120308130310.69c3c714@pomiocik.lan> <4F58D6A5.7070804@orlitzky.com> <20120308182844.11201771@pomiocik.lan> <4F58F103.5010503@orlitzky.com> <20120308175345.2c4b72ff@googlemail.com> <4F58FC55.7070005@orlitzky.com> <20120308184820.108fc30c@googlemail.com> <4F592612.6050203@orlitzky.com> <20120309060424.09cdce1e@pomiocik.lan> <4F599692.9050503@orlitzky.com> <4F599A61.8010600@gentoo.org> <4F5A16C5.7050303@orlitzky.com> <4F5A1C46.7080005@gentoo.org> <4F5A2001.30309@orlitzky.com> <4F5A2495.4060305@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4F5A2495.4060305@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: cae1098d-7308-4924-8b78-9e311648cba8 X-Archives-Hash: 0485c8274efcfc13ce8fa1c52e891ecd -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 09/03/12 10:41 AM, Zac Medico wrote: > On 03/09/2012 07:21 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> The advantage that the eapi function has over a comment is that >> it's not magic -- it's just normal bash syntax. So we've >> addressed that issue at a small performance cost (we're really >> only sourcing the ebuild up to 'exit'). > > Also consider the case where a user syncs after not having updated > for a couple of months, and the tree contains some ebuilds with > EAPIs that are not supported by the currently installed package > manager. IIRC we get this already, when the EAPI isn't supported by the version of portage installed -- upgrading really old systems won't allow an emerge of python-2.7 due to a too-new EAPI, and python-2.7 is needed to upgrade to the newer portage. I don't see how the EAPI check itself failing and thereby excluding an ebuild is much different than the specified EAPI excluding it..? Either way, the end user is going to have issues if they don't keep their portage up to date. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAk9aJ0QACgkQAJxUfCtlWe2tTAEA7iUgDOCaGoQhz1dXukQ/a3lY rsdqewd2DYZWtsv+3XoA/iRVe+qf4HXdkWTchFRHlolaTJechz6AZCzKY/sNdu4w =1e/8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----