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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-50071-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1S5glW-0006m7-24
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 17:04:34 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 72A51E0806;
Thu, 8 Mar 2012 17:04:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AECFE091F
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 17:03:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bkwj4 with SMTP id j4so623902bkw.40
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:03:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=iZ43HfR4aAE3AjVW9/SAHqCbNG9wZTBsVpzYpLC8yjo=;
b=U4ncoUtVfb52eoiYhiWBNIQKgkCwZVEwW/j7aZocTVqHLeWEq7sSd4Z4zT+sBj5+co
91L1Kwryr4ECLLvRxHeIJQ+haAdGyeI7LoJwVfw0qUGaFTh7v/o19NJ2PS/7dDQQ5B8K
lQ6WfLWMKhGLk0XfS1gc47+7ajGOYECsfe4UiEfx6EQ1WpPf3MOcYjor0JJs6G2RgvOn
QpCo4Ae7H9blmiND2Ad6K/oMX9rwdTkGvkPC4TTrmFTMHUs8GcRRzXRJxtmTKtmn8nec
34BanLBvbAdViz5QGPBVBweEx9i2KE0xNAEBnoDrEFTAqKlTK3uyIB2u4QDPq8a1x2Wv
RCLQ==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.157.17 with SMTP id z17mr3090411bkw.37.1331226220521; Thu,
08 Mar 2012 09:03:40 -0800 (PST)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.205.32.194 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:03:40 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20312.58250.856609.678242@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
References: <20311.51166.725757.212932@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
<4F58D71E.5020903@orlitzky.com>
<20312.58250.856609.678242@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 12:03:40 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: _B1A3UwZlfbYTGY2oHbq23MrA4c
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_kG8ZtJrUfcU5NRPq-5dGu-gMMuuFCMABzA2PS9kP4t_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: 529daddf-01ce-4b33-b82d-d5142c0bffa6
X-Archives-Hash: 5445796d85c0d15ef8a95ed8de57c5cb
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
>> There's also libbash now:
>
> Looks like complete overkill to me, considering the simple task at
> hand.
>
Plus, wasn't the whole point that we can't guarantee that the bash
installed on a user's system can parse the ebuild until we've checked
the EAPI? If we use libbash doesn't that just keep the same
constraint but on a different package? Is the current stable libbash
guaranteed to be able to parse a bash v12 script?
If you just parse the file with a defined set of rules without regard
to how bash might parse the file, then you can determine the EAPI and
then decide how to source it. For all we know EAPI G will turn
ebuilds into python scripts so trying to read the thing with bash or
libbash will be doomed to failure.
Rich