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 1S5fxZ-0007bz-AR for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:12:57 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7F291E077C; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 16:12:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-gx0-f181.google.com (mail-gx0-f181.google.com [209.85.161.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC070E0684 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 16:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ggni4 with SMTP id i4so346119ggn.40 for ; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 08:12:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=mTMkz2HIcVOdSCplldU5iS1NoLfEnPuB56k5d03xhbE=; b=PxPAGm5AnSKYs6+Gn8CTSQ6FlaNalyVQPgoljwX5WGPQh0RxMp13eVYlyKs8RDWPS3 /Xn98ZroITUv7CRsQizwIu3KhVcX7p7RQ7C8/Gb78vxN+kwruIK9Xnhg2HrQUsxfmHR9 0zIEFxj51R90Xwe211m9vWe99HYUAVUkDb7Fb+9u9pKtuyTGivz63R1IJijbV5XX3wHW 0ZfVWJ4fK5rUrzxIOOdbFu+dCWgk1dA2Qo1Dev0m3wfjKAOMueSNoZAzHZBZ4NbMi/6y 5ODq4gcQPS33vxNPdAm6eGGo0jX/8oNoreyCUMqRc56sDEHxnFn49ia1DqH0X9fyKq7c SKhQ== 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 Received: by 10.100.245.27 with SMTP id s27mr3437749anh.62.1331223120051; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 08:12:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.147.89.9 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 08:11:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4F58CFE3.8070408@gentoo.org> References: <20311.51166.725757.212932@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20312.24445.451487.577826@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <4F58CFE3.8070408@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 16:11:59 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds From: David Leverton To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: f9556944-1949-4aed-8d36-b5d89fb49e50 X-Archives-Hash: a8e9f771550e31428c8a51df5647b9cc On Mar 8, 2012 3:29 PM, "Zac Medico" wrote: > Something like DEPEND="foo bar" is also valid bash, and yet we don't > allow that either because "foo bar" does not contain valid dependency > atoms. There's a bit of a difference between caring about the value of a variable and caring about what syntax was used to assign it....