Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

[Thomas de Grenier de Latour]

On 2007/12/17, Piotr Jaroszyński <peper@g.o> wrote:

> http://dev.gentoo.org/~peper/glep-0055.html

>   * Possibility to extend the versioning rules in an EAPI, and to
> use them immediately in the Gentoo tree. For example, addition of
> the scm suffix - GLEP54 [1].
...
> Currently ebuilds are recognised by the .ebuild file extension and
> hence EAPI-suffixed ebuilds are simply ignored by the package manager
> allowing their immediate usage in the Gentoo tree.

What about other places where some "cat/pkg-version" are used? 

 - deps: ok, no pb, i guess EAPI=X ebuilds are not allowed to have
dependencies on some "cat/pkg-version" whose "version" is in a syntax
introduced in a later EAPI. Could be made explicit though.

 - metadata/cache: latest PMS i've found (2007/07/08 on dev.g.o/~spb)
says it contains some "<category>/<package>-<version>" files. If a
package manager assumes the "<version>" syntax is the one defined in
the said PMS, and you extend this syntax, don't your fear it will
trigger some bugs in said packages manager?

 - /var/db/pkg: this one is not specified anywhere afaik, but here too,
putting some "<category>/<package>-<version>" with a new "<version>"
syntax may trigger weird some packages manager bugs.  Which would
basically prevent forbid beetween several package managers which don't
support the same EAPI set, or simply downgrading your favorite one.

 - profiles/*: how will the various files there ("packages", etc.) ever
be allowed to use some atoms which use an extended versioning syntax?

I'm not saying that the idea is bad though (i 100% agree it's useful),
but "*.ebuild-x" being ignored by current pkg managers is not enough 
to conclude you can extend the versioning syntax without backward
compatibility issues.

-- 
TGL.
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list