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 1S62EA-0005dj-UT for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:59:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A7A77E06B0; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:59:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDCFCE09FA for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:58:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.26.5] (ip98-164-193-252.oc.oc.cox.net [98.164.193.252]) (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 4CB691B4036 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:58:47 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F5A28B6.2010404@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:58:46 -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> <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> <20120309125126.186969f9@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20120309125126.186969f9@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 6914ecd0-bea2-468a-bcdc-ffbe206d8f6e X-Archives-Hash: 329c5fd7094f0461358248e84ecc9f97 On 03/09/2012 07:51 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:41:09 -0800 > 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. >> >> In this case, when resolving dependencies and filtering ebuilds based >> on whether or not their EAPI is supported, spawning bash once per >> ebuild is much more costly than the alternatives. > > isnt the whole point of the proposal to get eapi without sourcing ? > > so that we can use new bash features at local or global scope without > risking that people with an old bash get syntax errors trying to get > the eapi Right. Michael has lost sight of the goal and is moving off on a tangent. -- Thanks, Zac