Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI-1 (or >1, perhaps) Proposal: AND Dependencies

["Kent Fredric" <kentfredric@gmail.com>]

On 6/15/07, John R. Graham <n3440d@gmail.com> wrote:
> I occasionally run across a package version dependency issue that cannot
> be elegantly solved by the current  dependency syntax.  Every time I've
> come across this, it's boiled down to a range.  For example, package
> some-cat/foo has the following versions in the tree
>     some-cat/foo-4.0.0-r2
>     some-cat/foo-4.1
>     some-cat/foo-4.1.1
>     some-cat/foo-4.1.2-r2
>     some-cat/foo-4.2.1-r5
>     some-cat/foo-4.3
>     some-cat/foo-4.4
>

/me votes for rubyesqe range syntax

some-cat/foo-( s:4.1 ..  s:4.2)  // start at slot 4.1 , and go upto
and including 4.2
some-cat/foo-( s:4.1 ... s:4.2) //  start at slot 4.1 and go upto, but
not including 4.2
some-cat/foo-( v:4.1.0 .. v:4.2.0  ) // start at version 4.1.0 and go
upto and including 4.2.0
some-cat/foo-( v:4.1.0 ... v:4.2.0  ) // start at version 4.1.0 and go
upto , but excluding 4.2.0

I know thats probably not possible in a bash env tho, but hopefully
the 'range' concept  will give some inspiration, as IMO, having to
specify the ebuild atom name for both upper and lower values is
redundant, and easily missused as lamented by Vlastimil Babka

/me hides in his corner to avoid abuse from people despising ruby lovers

/me goes and joins ruby addicts anonymous

-- 
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list